Edwina, List: Before I say anything else--I do not want to start up another tiresome argument here; I am just taking this opportunity to attempt, one more time, to explain my perspective.
While I am interested in your views, and Gary F.'s views, and other List participants' views--I am MOST interested in *Peirce's *views. What has bothered me so much is that you do not seem to distinguish carefully between your views and Peirce's views, such that you evidently take great offense when I or anyone else points out that they are (objectively) *different*. Unfortunately, that is when the name-calling often starts--accusing anyone who dares to say such a thing of claiming to be "the Master-Guru of Peirce," or "the Authoritative Voice of Peirce," or some other equally ridiculous title. With all due respect, this is not at all conducive to open and fruitful discussion--and that is why I have a hard time just "letting it go," as you are proposing. Now, I have not always been as circumspect in composing my posts as I should be, either; and for that, I once again sincerely apologize, both to you and to the List community. I hope that we can be more polite to each other going forward, so that we can perhaps even learn from each other using the method of science, rather than digging in against each other using the method of tenacity. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote: > Gary F - on a further note, what puzzles me is why you and Jon get so > upset by my analyses of Peirce. All you have to do is - several things. > Declare that you disagree, and then, don't analyze further; just fully > describe and express your views. If I write back with my disagreement, > then, again, just declare that you disagree - and, fully describe YOUR > views. Then, you wait for all the many approving comments and discussion on > your views. You need not even refer to my 'disagreeable' views when you > post. Or - you could simply delete my posts! > > But- to insist that your view is the true analysis of Peirce - well, I > think that's a 'bit much'. And if you consider that is 'name-calling', so > be it. > > 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 peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
