Dear list:
Everyone owns earnestness. But different ones claim Truth, of which contradictions imply only one. And who claims historicism and who esotericism? What decides it; the moon or the finger? …and so goes the world… Best, Jerry R On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 <[email protected]> > 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 > [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 .
