Adrian, List,

I would start with the three normative sciences of aesthetics, ethics, and 
logic.
When semiotics becomes normative it falls within logic, so I would worry whether
pure aesthetics has much to do with objective or even interpretive meaning, 
that is
to say, semantics or pragmatics.  Just a worry, I will have to think on it a 
while.

From where I see it, concerned primarily with applications to scientific 
inquiry and
empirical data, the discussion of Peirce's categories over the last 20 years or 
so has
undergone such debasement that it now borders on a style of philosophical 
astrology.

Regards,

Jon

On 2/9/2016 11:33 AM, Adrian Ivakhiv wrote:
Dear all:

I'm struggling with a way of tying Peirce's categories down to the 3 main 
elements by which we can make sense of art
works: their materiality, our experience of them, and their meanings. Putting 
it that way suggests one ordering, but a
deeper thinking through of the process (and nonlinear) nature of the categories 
suggests another. I'm interested in
gauging what Peircians may think. I'd appreciate any comments directly on the 
web site below:

http://blog.uvm.edu/aivakhiv/2016/02/09/rethinking-the-3-categories/

Thanks!

Rethinking the 3 categories

February 9, 2016 byAdrian J Ivakhiv 
<http://blog.uvm.edu/aivakhiv/author/aivakhiv/>

I've been struggling with how my triadic framework for interpreting art works 
relates to C. S. Peirce's categories
<http://www.textlog.de/4254.html>.

When I first developed my triadism (fleshed out
<http://blog.uvm.edu/aivakhiv/2014/12/29/emis-cinematic-materialism-a-response-to-reviews/>in/Ecologies
 of the Moving
Image <http://www.wlupress.wlu.ca/Catalog/ivakhiv.shtml>/) into the 
non-Peircian terms of materiality, experience, and
representation 
<http://blog.uvm.edu/aivakhiv/2014/03/08/rethinking-the-three-ecologies/> --- 
which I did in the context
of teaching a course on the environmental arts --- I loosely considered the 
first of these to be analogous to Peircian
firstness, the second to secondness, and the third to thirdness.

The point, in my teaching, was not to adhere strictly to Peirce, since my 
students weren't studying him, but just to
have a handy triadic formula that would be useful for making sense of the 
eco-arts in ways that get beyond the customary
overemphasis on/representation/in favor of/experience/(including affect) 
and/materiality/. Materiality deals with the
stuff that's just there (one element); experience involves a second --- the 
artist, the reader or viewer, et al. (two);
and representation makes sense and meaning of the stuff and its shapers and 
perceivers in real-world contexts (three);
thus Peirce's categories loosely fit. Whether students got the Peirce or not, 
they could follow that.

But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that this way of ordering 
the three may be un-Peircian. Or at least
that there was a second way of connecting it to Peirce that was sufficiently 
different from the first and had important
consequences.

Let me break it down here.

* To continue reading, go to *
http://blog.uvm.edu/aivakhiv/2016/02/09/rethinking-the-3-categories*/*

______________________________________________________________________________
Adrian J. Ivakhiv
Professor of Environmental Studies/Environmental Thought & Culture
Rubenstein School of Environment & Natural Resources
University of Vermont, Burlington VT 05405 U.S.A.
Tel 802.656.0180 Fax 802.656.8015 Email: [email protected]
http://vermont.academia.edu/AdrianIvakhiv
http://blog.uvm.edu/aivakhiv
http://www.uvm.edu/~aivakhiv


--

academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
-----------------------------
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 .




Reply via email to