Edwina, List:

I disagree with just about everything in your last message, but I really
appreciate the discussion.  We evidently read Peirce very differently, or
perhaps simply adopt different portions of his writings as our own
positions.  Hopefully others will join in and provide additional
perspectives.

It sounds like you take the view that the immediate/dynamic/final
interpretants are the same as the emotional/energetic/logical
interpretants.  I have not definitively made up my mind about that, but
lean more toward seeing them as distinct trichotomies.

The English word "man" is a Symbol, which makes it a Legisign or Type,
which means that its Being is general.  While it indeed only "exists" in
its instantiations--Replicas, which are Sinsigns or Tokens--it is Real
independently of them.  This is NOT Platonism, it is Peircean
three-category Realism.

One thing on which we do agree is that "the full range of meaning falls
within the purview of Thirdness."  But this says nothing more than that
meaning is a matter of the Interpretants--all three of them--rather than
the Sign or the Objects.  I am not aware of anything in Peirce's writings
that warrants characterizing the Immediate Interpretant as internal to the
individual, rather than internal to the Sign.

Regarding determination, as I said before, I understand it mainly as
constraint, not causation.  The Dynamic Object can only generate certain
Immediate Objects, and each of those can only be represented by certain
Signs.  The Final Interpretant will be one or more of the Dynamic
Interpretants, which will all fall within the range of the Immediate
Interpretant, which is dictated by the Sign.

I am not sure what you mean when you say, "But a Sign operates within
matter!"  Are you suggesting that Signs ONLY operate within matter?  I am
pretty sure that Peirce would never condone such a statement.

Again, the Immediate
Object is internal to the Sign itself.  I took "individual
site-of-semeiosis" as a substitute for "human mind"; if this is not how you
are using that term, then I guess that I need you to explain it.

Regards,

Jon
-----------------------------
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