Jeff, Your message seems a bit garbled in the middle, but if you're suggesting that some of the trichotomies Peirce mentions in NDTR but does not develop there are developed elsewhere, that seems very likely to me. But how those developments relate to phenomenology on the one hand, and analysis of sign types on the other, is still not clear to me. I'll be interested to see what comes out of testing your hunch "that the triads of the dyadic relations between sign and object, sign and interpretant, and interpretant and object are the building blocks out of which larger triads of triadic relations are formed." Peirce doesn't deal with the latter two dyadic relations in NDTR, as far as I can see.
Gary f. -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Brian Downard [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 30-Nov-15 16:58 To: 'PEIRCE-L' <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations Hello Gary F. In the remarks on the opening pages of NDTR (CP 2.238-9): "This would give us a second set of trichotomies that would generate ten classes of triadic relation, but again, Peirce uses only the first of those trichotomies in his analysis of sign types. This trichotomy is according as the dyadic relations between Sign and Object (constituted by the S-O-I relation) are of the nature of possibilities (icon), facts (index), or laws (symbol)." Why think that, in this essay, he is only focusing on the division of the ten classes based on the triadic relations between the three correlates. On my view, he has worked out a rather elaborate account of the triads that hold between the dyadic relations in "On the Logic of Mathematics, an attempt to develop my categories from within" and in "Nomenclature and Division of Dyadic Relations (NDDR). My hunch is that the triads of the dyadic relations between sign and object, sign and interpretant, and interpretant and object are the building blocks out of which larger triads of triadic relations are formed. At this point, we are then dealing with thoroughly genuine triadic relations--as he calls them in "The Logic of Mathematics." --Jeff Jeff Downard Associate Professor Department of Philosophy NAU (o) 523-8354
----------------------------- 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 .
