List:

In the spin-off thread on Universes and Categories, I proposed that--analogous
to the blackboard diagram--the Immediate Interpretant is a continuum of
potentiality on which the Dynamic Interpretant is actualized, and the
universal tendency to take habits then leads to the development of the
Final Interpretant.  Further contemplation of this notion led me to several
other passages from Peirce's writings that together suggest what I think is
an interesting synthesis.

CSP:  So, then, the essence of Reason is such that its being never can have
been completely perfected.  It always must be in a state of incipiency, of
growth ... This development of Reason consists, you will observe, in
embodiment, that is, in manifestation.  The creation of the universe, which
did not take place during a certain busy week, in the year 4004 B.C., but
is going on today and never will be done, is this very developement of
Reason.  I do not see how one can have a more satisfying ideal of the
admirable than the development of Reason so understood.  The one thing
whose admirableness is not due to an ulterior reason is Reason itself
comprehended in all its fullness, so far as we can comprehend it.  Under
this conception, the ideal of conduct will be to execute our little
function in the operation of the creation by giving a hand toward rendering
the world more reasonable whenever, as the slang is, it is "up to us" to do
so.  In logic, it will be observed that knowledge is reasonableness; and
the ideal of reasoning will be to follow such methods as must develope
knowledge the most speedily. (CP 1.615, EP 2.255; 1903)

CSP:  ... the universe is a vast representamen, a great symbol of God's
purpose, working out its conclusions in living realities.  Now every symbol
must have, organically attached to it, its Indices of Reactions and its
Icons of Qualities; and such part as these reactions and these qualities
play in an argument that, they of course, play in the universe--that
Universe being precisely an argument ... The Universe as an argument is
necessarily a great work of art, a great poem--for every fine argument is a
poem and a symphony--just as every true poem is a sound argument. (CP
5.119, EP 2.193-194; 1903)

CSP:  The hypothesis of God is a peculiar one, in that it supposes an
infinitely incomprehensible object, although every hypothesis, as such,
supposes its object to be truly conceived in the hypothesis.  This leaves
the hypothesis but one way of understanding itself; namely, as vague yet as
true so far as it is definite, and as continually tending to define itself
more and more, and without limit.  The hypothesis, being thus itself
inevitably subject to the law of growth, appears in its vagueness to represent
God as so, albeit this is directly contradicted in the hypothesis from its
very first phase.  But this apparent attribution of growth to God, since it
is ineradicable from the hypothesis, cannot, according to the hypothesis,
be flatly false.  Its implications concerning the Universes will be
maintained in the hypothesis, while its implications concerning God will be
partly disavowed, and yet held to be less false than their denial would
be.  Thus the hypothesis will lead to our thinking of features of each
Universe as purposed; and this will stand or fall with the hypothesis.  Yet
a purpose essentially involves growth, and so cannot be attributed to God.
Still it will, according to the hypothesis, be less false to speak so than
to represent God as purposeless. (CP 6.466, EP 2.439-440; 1908)

CSP:  An *Argument* is a sign which distinctly represents the Interpretant,
called its *Conclusion*, which it is intended to determine. (CP 2.95; 1902)


Peirce's cosmology is ultimately less about what happened in the distant
past than about what is going on *right now*.  In semeiotic terms, the
universe is a vast Representamen--specifically, an Argument, and therefore
also a Symbol; a manifestation primarily of Thirdness, but also necessarily
involving elements of Firstness (Icons of Qualities) and Secondness
(Indices of Reactions).  The Dynamic Object of the universe as an Argument
is God Himself, infinitely incomprehensible, vague but continually becoming
more and more definite without limit; and its Immediate Object is God's
purpose, which is the development of Reason--this very growth of knowledge
about God, as well as about the three Universes of Experience that He has
created and is still creating.  Finally, the Interpretant of the universe
as an Argument is its Conclusion, the living realities that it is always
working out--the Immediate Interpretant, as a continuum of potentiality,
serving as the substrate for actualization of individual Dynamic
Interpretants, and the habit-taking tendency developing some of these into
Final Interpretants.

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
-----------------------------
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