Gary F, List, Thanks for posting this passage from 'The Logic of Mathematics'. It has got me looking at that extraordinary piece of minute logic yet again. Indeed, the essay seems nearly inexhaustible, at least for me and especially given that it is Peirce's avowed "attempt to develop my categories from within."
In any event, commenting on the passage, which concludes: It is not time and space which produce this character. It is rather this character which for its realization calls for something like time and space. — Peirce, CP 1.433 (c. 1896) You wrote: GF: Secondness as individual existence ‘calls for’ continuity as Thirdness, while on the other side of the coin of meaning, the niche in meaning space ‘calls for’ its inhabitation. Semiosic *determination*, like the ‘imprinting’ of a new hatchling on its parent, is a reciprocal realization. I agree that there is a reciprocity in semiosic determination, that 2ns and 3ns "call for" each other, that that is what makes of any given semiosis a genunie triadic relation. But I think you may be hinting at something deeper here, so that if you would explicate your meaning a bit further, that would be quite helpful. Meanwhile, I want to read more on either side of the passage you quoted. For example, the paragraph just above it is intimately related to it, saying it "in other words, so to speak. Here Peirce remarks that "the fact fights its way into existence." It has its here and now; and into that place it must crowd its way. For just as we can only know facts by their acting upon us, and resisting our brute will [. . .], so we can only conceive a fact as gaining reality by actions against other realities (CP 1.432). And I am pretty certain that he uses the term 'reality' here advisedly. Best, Gary R [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* *Communication Studies* *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* *C 745* *718 482-5690* On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:19 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Since my blog post for today concerns the relationship between existence > and determination, I’m copying it here under this subject line. The blog > version is at http://gnusystems.ca/wp/2016/05/niche-fulfillment/ . > > > > Gary f. > > > > } Innocence sees that this is it, and finds it world enough, and time. > [Annie Dillard] { > > http://gnusystems.ca/wp/ }{ *Turning Signs* gateway > > > > > > > > A niche in meaning space <http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/mns.htm#nchmns> > insists on being filled if possible, and determines the form of its > occupant, but not the actual existence of that occupant. It can only select > something more or less vaguely resembling that form and actually existing > in the universe where the system can find it; the *act* of meaning, the > triadic > action <http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/tpx.htm#trax> of a sign, involves its > existence, its secondness. > > > > There are different kinds of existence. There is the existence of physical > actions, there is the existence of psychical volitions, there is the > existence of all time, there is the existence of the present, there is the > existence of material things, there is the existence of the creations of > one of Shakespeare’s plays, and, for aught we know, there may be another > creation with a space and time of its own in which things may exist. Each > kind of existence consists in having a place among the total collection of > such a universe. It consists in being a second to any object in such > universe taken as first. It is not time and space which produce this > character. It is rather this character which for its realization calls for > something like time and space. > > — Peirce, CP 1.433 (c. 1896) > > > > In this sense, Secondness as individual existence ‘calls for’ continuity > as Thirdness, while on the other side of the coin of meaning, the niche in > meaning space ‘calls for’ its inhabitation. Semiosic *determination*, > like the ‘imprinting’ of a new hatchling on its parent, is a reciprocal > realization. > > > > We know that the newborn chick looking for its mom actually relies on at > least two different neural systems, one for orienting toward stimuli that > are good candidates for being mom, and another for taking whatever it can > get, for storing a memory of anything that the chick might be exposed to. > The first system will choose an adult chick (or even a stuffed duck) over a > box as its go-to-caregiver, but if there’s nothing else around, the second > system will lead the chick to settle for the box. > > — Marcus (2004, 104) > > > > The first system here would correspond to the top half of the meaning > cycle <http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/mdl.htm#meancyc>, the second system to > the bottom half. Likewise, a reader looking for guidance in a turning sign > or “scripture” will ‘seek until he finds’ and then use whatever he finds to > guide his practice (including any further seeking); the niche in meaning > space that yearns for fulfillment *will* be filled regardless of which > text the seeker ‘finds.’ > > > > > ----------------------------- > 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 .
