Gary F, List, I'd like to comment briefly on a remark you made in your post today.
GF: As far as I can see, Peirce does not attempt such a collection [a third trichotomy, GR] in NDTR. That leaves Peirce’s third trichotomy of Signs unaccounted for, so far; and *my guess is that this trichotomy can only apply to **genuine triadic relations, such as are embodied in the processes of representing and determining** — which in my opinion are both genuine, partly because they are mirror images of each other.* But the next paragraph contains the only replica of the word “genuine” in NDTR, and Peirce does not use its antonym term “degenerate” here at all, so I’ll say no more about it here.[emphasis added by GR] I agree. For me this "mirror image" is at the very least reinforced categorially. This was first pointed out to me by Mats Bergman (I believe in his doctoral dissertation) in referring to a paper by R. Palmentier "Signs' Place in Medias Res: Peirce's Concept of Semiotic Mediation." Semiotic Mediation: Sociocultural and Psychological Perspectives. Ed. Mertz, Elizabeth & Parmentier. 1985. and which mirror image I first discussed in a paper on Peirce's trichotomic theory,"Outline of trikonic: Diagrammatic Trichotomic" in Section 5 on trichotomic vectors (i.e., possible paths through the three categories, probably several vectors occuring together in any actual semiosis). http://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/menu/library/aboutcsp/richmond/trikonic.htm So, while all would agree that, for Peirce, when there is semiosis that the object (2ns) *determines* the sign (1ns) for the interpretant sign (3ns), Parmentier objects to Peirce's not drawing sufficient attention to its mirror, *representation*. So, for example (and using the *kind* of example Parmentier's gives): An interpretant/interpreter (3ns) within a particular art form, say a brilliant and creative playwright, say Shakespeare, out the wealth of his imagination could create a great and influential art work, a play, say Hamlet (1ns: the entire play being a sign, the character Hamlet being a sign, every word, every punctuation mark, etc. of the work being a sign), bringing into quasi-existence a *virtual world* of imagined relations (2ns). In this sense, *determination*: 2ns/1ns/3ns categorially mirrors *representation*: 3ns/1ns/2ns. While I perhaps see Parmentier's point as regards the neglect by Peirce of this categorial vector in art, I do not see that Peirce neglected it in his primary focus, namely, science. Thus, to offer a very different example: An interpretan/interpreter (3ns) within a particular field of science, say a brilliant and creative theoretical physicist, say Einstein, out of the tremendous storehouse of his scientific and mathematical knowledge and creativity could hypothesize a great and influential theory, say, the general theory of relativity (1ns: the entire theory being a sign, every mathematical symbol, etc. being a sign), bringing into our scientific understanding a *model *of the large-scale structure of our 'actual' universe (2ns). [I've added a *very* brief note on trichotomic vector analysis at '*' below my signature.] Now I don't know whether you had this categorial mirroring in mind when you wrote what I just quoted above, Gary. In any case, I have given this post a new subject heading in the interest of emphasing the "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'. Best, Gary R * [In my understanding, *this *"mirror" represents but two of six possible vectors (again, paths through the categories) Note: in my paper mentioned above, I first called the 'vector of 'involution', mentioned above, the 'vector of analysis', but I now call it the path or order or 'vector of involution' as closer to Peirce's meaning and usage. The other 5 names have stayed the same: determination (i.e., semiotic determination), process (which, btw, includes evolution and inquiry), representation, aspiration (of the individual or community), order (shorthand for Hegelian or dialectical order), and, of course, the 6th just mentioned, involution ( again, the analysis of *categorial* involution commencing at 3ns). For more on categorial vectors, see my paper linked to above. [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* *Communication Studies* *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* *C 745* *718 482-5690 <718%20482-5690>*
----------------------------- 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 .
