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.


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 .

Reply via email to