Hi all,


I assert that esthetics, ethics and logic can be directly assessed in a
paradigmatic example: Promoting convergence: the phi spiral in abduction of
mouse corneal behaviors.



The example is useful because it doesn’t simply make claims.  It puts a
single, unitary example of inquiry about a wonderful phenomenon out there,
outside of myself, for others to criticize as astrology if they choose.  But
if critics belong to a society of men and women executing science in
Peirce’s sense, i.e., with genuine doubt and a critical habit of mind for
finding out the truth as a leading principle, then it will be simple enough
to determine whether the example offers a clear choice as to what makes
“the beautiful beautiful” in phi spiral abduction.  That is, why this idea
and the imagination it stimulates is admirable.



However, you need “knowledge of the relevant criteria by means of which one
can define and justify using ‘beauty’ as a category.  Factors such as
proportion, contrast, harmony, integrity, etc. (Potter)” can be imagined
and justified.  It appeals to previous knowledge of STEM and the humanities.
I think with sufficient background knowledge, this Idea can be understood
in a Peircean sense because it sits across the atomistic/continuum boundary:




“Some words shall herein be capitalised when used, not as vernacular, but
as terms defined. Thus an "idea" is the substance of an actual unitary
thought or fancy; but "Idea," nearer Plato
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato>'s idea of ἰδέα, denotes anything
whose Being consists in its mere capacity for getting fully represented,
regardless of any person's faculty or impotence to represent it.”~Peirce



Hth,

J

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ox of course ...
>
> http://www.travelchinaguide.com/intro/social_customs/zodiac/ox.htm
>
> It's not exactly my year this year, though it be my month and day ...
>
> My feeling for art and my sense of aesthetics
> I learned at my mother's knee and in her school.
> Peirce came much later so I likely interpret him
> in accord with lines and shapes she taught me to
> see and scrawl and sculpt and sketch and tool
> and later still to carve in blocks of memory.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon
>
>
> On 2/11/2016 10:12 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> > What sign are you, Jon?
> >
> > Sorry, I couldn't resist ...
> >
> > From your comment, it sounds like you are working
> > with a debased concept of "aesthetics" which many
> > confuse with Peirce's normative science which goes
> > by that name, thus breaking its cognitive continuity
> > with the realms of empirical science and common sense.
> > I think John Kaag's recent book Thinking Through the
> > Imagination could be a good corrective for that tendency,
> > with its focus on the logic of abduction.
> >
> > Gary f.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: 11-Feb-16 09:47
> >
> >> 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
>
> --
>
> 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
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
-----------------------------
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