Gary F., List:

I re-read Chiasson's paper last night, and can definitely see some
similarities; most notably, the idea of nesting one cycle of
abduction/deduction/induction within another.  However, my impression is
that she is still talking mainly about inquiry (gaining knowledge), rather
than ingenuity (solving problems).

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt

On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Gary F., List:
>
> I suppose that it is possible; I would have to go back and re-read her
> paper, then give it some further thought.  Inquiry vs. ingenuity is
> probably more a difference in emphasis than anything terribly substantive.
>
> CSP:  "Doubt is an uneasy and dissatisfied state from which we struggle
> to free ourselves and pass into the state of belief; while the latter is a
> calm and satisfactory state which we do not wish to avoid, or to change to
> a belief in anything else." (CP 5.372)
>
> Peirce seems to be saying here that the *reason* why doubt is an
> irritation is *because* it is "an uneasy and dissatisfied state," in
> contrast to the "calm and satisfactory state" of belief.  This suggests to
> me that dissatisfaction is the more fundamental motivation, and
> satisfaction is the more fundamental objective.  We engage in inquiry
> whenever we are dissatisfied with our current knowledge (or lack thereof);
> my working hypothesis is that we engage in ingenuity whenever we are
> dissatisfied with *any* aspect of the current situation.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 9:34 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Jon, is it possible that your “logic of ingenuity” is Phyllis Chiasson’s
>> “retroduction”?
>>
>>
>>
>> Gary f.
>>
>
-----------------------------
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