Inquiry Blog:
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2016/04/04/definition-and-determination-11/

Peirce List:
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/18569
JBD:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/18598

Jeff, List,

Let me go back to this point in the discussion and emphasize
a few points that appear to have gotten lost in what followed.

I thought my first paragraph made it clear that I would be
focusing on “the meaning of determination as it figures in
Peirce's definition of a sign relation”.  If I get a chance
to revise that second paragraph I'll add a word to reinforce
that focus, say, as follows:

> Looking back over many previous discussions on the Peirce
> List, I think the most important and frequently missed point
> is that concepts like correspondence and determination in
> Peirce['s semiotics] refer to triadic forms of correspondence
> and determination, and that these do not reduce to the dyadic
> structures that are endemic to the more reductionist paradigms.

Okay, I hope that much is clear now.

By “Peirce's definition of a sign relation” I really mean the
select number of his best definitions, not mere descriptions,
the definitions that are strong enough to bear the load of
a consequential and consistent theory of sign relations.

The best candidates I can think of in that regard
are the 2 variants from NEM 4, quoted on this page:

https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2012/06/01/c-s-peirce-%E2%80%A2-on-the-definition-of-logic/

I'll have to break here as I've got plumbers coming to fix some pipes ...

Regards,

Jon

On 4/4/2016 9:40 AM, Jon Awbrey wrote:
Peircers,

The subject of determination comes up from time to time.
Here is a link to an assortment of excerpts I collected
back when I was first trying to understand the meaning
of determination as it figures in Peirce's definition
of a sign relation.

http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/User:Jon_Awbrey/EXCERPTS

Looking back over many previous discussions on the Peirce List,
I think the most important and frequently missed point is that
concepts like correspondence and determination in Peirce refer
to triadic forms of correspondence and determination, and that
these do not reduce to the dyadic structures that are endemic
to the more reductionist paradigms.

In this more general perspective, the family of concepts including
correspondence, determination, law, relation, structure, and so on
all fall under the notion of constraint.  Constraint is present in
a system to the extent that one set of choices is distinguished by
some mark from a larger set of choices.  That mark may distinguish
the actual from the possible, the desired from the conceivable, or
any number of other possibilities depending on the subject in view.

Regards,

Jon


--

academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/

-----------------------------
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