Gary, list: I disagree with you that Peirce was exact  in his use of  terms, 
and frankly, his work is so complex that it is open to analysis and 
interpretation. If it were not open to analysis and interpretation - then, 
there would be no possibility of debate or discussion. We could simply recite 
his texts, all agree to their singular meaning....and..walk away. Nothing to 
interpret, nothing to analyze. Just agreement.

But this is not the case. Peirce's own analysis evolved, developed and is 
complex. We've seen this in the long and often quite argumentative debates that 
have taken place on this list regarding, eg, the three modes of thought, the 
meaning of various terms, etc. 

So - I don't know what you are suggesting as the proper mode of 'interpretation 
and analysis of Peirce' on this list- When you suggest that any different 
interpretation is, instead of being a different interpretation - is instead a 
'personal semeiotic theory'. I think that such authoritarianism is not 
conducive to the study of Peirce.

Edwina
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: [email protected] 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 11:54 AM
  Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Theory of Thinking


  Edwina (and list),

   

  I agree with your opinion that the focus of this list should be on the 
interpretation and analysis of Peirce and the use of his analytic framework for 
scientific or philosophical purposes. I think everyone in agreement with this 
should therefore refrain from presenting their beliefs about semiosis, or their 
personal semiotic theories, unless  their relation to Peircean semiotics can be 
demonstrated by specific reference or citation to what Peirce actually wrote 
and the context in which he wrote it. When we are focussed on interpretation 
and analysis of a specific Peirce text (such as his “Neglected Argument” 
paper), the discussion should refer to (and preferably quote) specific parts or 
aspects of that text, along with any other Peirce texts relevant to the issue. 
Lacking such accurate and specific reference, any claim that a personal theory 
is an interpretation of Peirce represents nothing more than a personal belief 
and is outside the focus of this list.

   

  Interpretation of a writer as exact as Peirce in his use of terms requires 
close attention to his text in its context, not free improvisation on his 
themes within a context of one’s own design.

   

  Gary f.

   

  From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:[email protected]] 
  Sent: 15-Sep-16 10:35
  To: Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]>; [email protected]
  Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Theory of Thinking

   

  Jon, list - you still don't seem to understand. My personal beliefs are 
completely irrelevant to my interpretation and analysis of Peirce. That is, my 
interpretations and analysis can be a completely accurate outline of Peircean 
thought - even if my own beliefs are different. [I am not saying that they are; 
I am only outlining an IF-THEN framework]. Therefore, there is no need for you 
to inquire about my personal beliefs - and no need for you to 'discuss other 
points where my beliefs are different from those of Peirce'. Who cares? What 
difference does it make?

   

  Just as I am not interested in your personal beliefs - for they should have 
no relevance to your ability to analyze and interpret Peirce - I would 
appreciate that you stop asking me to tell you where my beliefs agree with/do 
not agree with - those of Peirce.

   

  The focus should be on the interpretation and analysis of Peirce. And the use 
of his analytic framework in other areas - such as science. Not on whether or 
not we are, personally,  iconic clones of his work.

   

  Edwina



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



  -----------------------------
  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 .




Reply via email to