List, Jerry, Stephen,
It seems to be commonly assumed that CSP created a theory of signs. -
Well, amongst other things, he did. - But it was not what he was after.
- He was after a theory, or rather a method and methodogy of finding out
meanings.
By the end of 1800, there was a kind of mania to classification - and
standardisation. - CSP was not immunune to that.
Still, to reave what he achieved, the focus has to remain in his later
works, after 1900.
It was not about signs, it was about meaning.
Kirsti
Jerry LR Chandler kirjoitti 27.2.2016 23:12:
List, Stephen:
On 2/26/2016 5:38 PM, Stephen C. Rose wrote:
> I see abduction as guessing (and approved by CP), induction as having some
> evidence but less than deduction which is fallible but the best we can do
> to prove something. I have been cautioned against writing brief notes to
> the list. Cheers, S
>
Have you considered the difference that distinguishes constrained
guessing from mere indexing the possibilities in one’s mind and
randomly choosing a member of the index as a guess?
Is that you mental image of CSP’s usage of the term “abduction” in
logic?
If so, then I suggest you are missing a critical component of CSP’s
description of how to interpret signs in relation to its deictic
actions.
In CSP’s view, a sign necessarily has both denotative and connotative
actions; the capabilities of the observer may constrain his (her)
interpretative capacities to one set of indices or another set of
indices, depending on the prior experiences. The nature of the index
assigned to a sinsign is a personal choice of the individual observer
of the sign, is it not? And, the form of the index itself may include
ethical and moral values, can it not?
In one field of inquiry, the indices from the sinsign, qualisigns and
legisigns may generate a discrete set of abductive choices. CSP named
these choices the dicisigns. The choices are, in modern terminology,
cybernetic choices in that they form a circular argument with a
bounded set of symbols, legisigns and sinsigns. These choices can
also be expressed as logical diagrams in CSP assertions about logical
systems.
Cheers
Jerry
-----------------------------
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 .
