Jon, list:


You said:

“ I find it rather implausible that a work entitled "A Neglected Argument
for the Reality of God" was somehow intended to be more about "the
*attitude *and *method *from which all decisions of importance to the
conduct of a life should begin," such that the content of the hypothesis
itself is secondary or even irrelevant.”



That is an interesting statement.  Is it your claim, then, that the actual
proposition should matter?



If it matters so much, then, what is it for this situation, the
proposition/hypothesis; that thing that makes the matter answerable?


That is, if "The hypothesis cannot be admitted, even as a hypothesis,
unless it be supposed that it would account for the facts or some of them?"
what is the argument in logical form for the NA?  Where is the beginning of
such a thing?

Thanks,
Jerry R

On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>  Ben N., List:
>
> I appreciate the suggestion, and Chiasson's article is interesting.
> However, I find it rather implausible that a work entitled "A Neglected
> Argument for the Reality of God" was somehow intended to be more about "the 
> *attitude
> *and *method *from which all decisions of importance to the conduct of a
> life should begin," such that the content of the hypothesis itself is
> secondary or even irrelevant.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
>
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 5:31 PM, Ben Novak <trevriz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Clark, Jon, Jerry, Edwina, List:
>>
>> Perhaps this essay can help in finding what Peirce meant by speaking of
>> this "theory of thinking" in the Neglected Argument:
>>
>> http://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/menu/library/aboutcsp/chiasson/revisit.htm
>>
>> Ben N.
>>
>> *Ben Novak <http://bennovak.net>*
>> 5129 Taylor Drive, Ave Maria, FL 34142
>> Telephone: (814) 808-5702
>>
>> *"All art is mortal, **not merely the individual artifacts, but the arts
>> themselves.* *One day the last portrait of Rembrandt* *and the last bar
>> of Mozart will have ceased to be—**though possibly a colored canvas and
>> a sheet of notes may remain—**because the last eye and the last ear
>> accessible to their message **will have gone." *Oswald Spengler
>>
>
>
> -----------------------------
> 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
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
-----------------------------
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