Edwina,
By "we" I means 'the widest collective of creative agents.' By "we
chose" I meant 'we chose to construct this out of nothing.' In that way
we are like the Biblical God; and the real God is our construction. But
that doesn't make Him any less real than gravity. It's just that He
isn't eternal. Even the conception of 'creating' must have changed over
our evolution, it just looks like creating from my perspective looking back.
I'm pretty sure Margolis draws the line in the middle of reality between
encultured artifacts and the rest. In what I've read, he only questions
whether we should include mathematics, but he doesn't commit. I'm pretty
sure his stance on the pre-cognitive physical world (distinguished from
cognitive determinations about what it is), which is so prominent in
Secondness, is prior to any things we created. I push things maybe too
far in the Madhyamaka direction, where everything even remotely
conceivable is our construction. But hey, someone's gotta test the waters.
Matt
On 10/16/15 8:42 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote:
We have 'chosen' language? I wasn't aware, first, that man'
constructed his world through evolution' - and what does this
actually mean? That man 'evolved' [clarify?]and so, began to do what -
grow wheat? And second, to 'choose' language suggests that it existed
a priori, along with other options, and mankind simply 'chose one option.
Edwina
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
