Clark, list - thanks, I see your point, but my quibble is with the
interpretation of the 'Immediate Object'.
I see it as a personal rather than common meaning. That is - you define the
immediate object as the average nature' whereas I define it as strictly
personal and limited to my own limitations of both sensation and experience.
The commonality of meaning, in my view, emerges within the transformative
actions of the Representamen - that ADDS commonality and knowledge to my
personal and limited experience [which is the Immediate Object]...and
transforms it into the Immediate Interpretant. This Immediate Interpretant, I
think, has been transformed from the limited data base of the Immediate Object;
it has been enriched by the habits of the Representamen - and now, has
commonality of meaning. ..which I will then articulate in ..eg..a word.
Edwina
----- Original Message -----
From: Clark Goble
To: Peirce-L
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Dynamic/Immediate Object and Determination/Causation
On Aug 25, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote:
My outline of the same situation brings in the categories, where
1) The Dynamic Object is the existential nature of the weather - which
interacts with my eyes [both are dynamic objects]; both are interacting in the
Mode of Secondness [as well as the other two categories..or there would be no
such thing as 'weather' or 'eyes'].
2) The Immediate Object would be my internal sensation of feeling the
impact of this data-So, it operates in a degenerate Secondness [in a mode of
2-1).
3) This feeling is then transformed by the Representamen - operating in all
three modes of Thirdness -3-3 [my learned memory of weather], 3-2 [my
anticipation of truth], 3-1 [the commonality of awareness of the
situation])...and I come up with an internal Immediate Interpretant or specific
consciousness of non-verbalized 'cloudiness'...
4) which is then articulated, [using the norms of my language -3-3] as the
word 'cloudy' as the Dynamic Interpretant - which is in a mode of Secondness in
itself as a word or symbol to attach to that Dynamic Object.
That is as far as i go in this interaction. Again, this is non-linear and
complex. I think that each nodal site might have other interactions affecting
the outcome as well. That is, when I view the external Dynamic Object - I might
be at the same time experiencing other Dynamic Objects - [eg, the cold, the
sounds of rain..etc...]...which will affect not only my Internal Immediate
Object - for these will add data to my experience...but..will affect the
Representamen and thus, the Interpretants.
And so- we come up with the fact that multiple witnesses each see the same
thing - and interpret it differently.
Where I’d quibble is in your discussion of the immediate object. I’d agree
that for some signs you’re completely correct. I don’t think it’s sufficient
though with your example. Again this gets at the “average” nature of the
immediate object for Peirce that enables me to communicate. Certainly my
feeling is part of that, but cannot be all of it.
Again though a lot really depends upon the type of analysis one is doing and
the features one is most concerned with in ones analysis. So the event of
Peirce saying to his wife, “it is cloudy outside,” is open to numerous types of
analysis. I think in typical usage though parts you put in the immediate
interpretant must also be in the immediate object. Indeed I’d say it’s this
commonality between the immediate interpretant and immediate object that allows
communication to happen. Typically the immediate interpretant is a small subset
of the immediate object - although it can also differ due to the potential for
error. (Swerve)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
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 .
