Jeff. List
My problem – probably arising from my scientific background as a biologist – is
that I still do not see how Peirce explains in cosmogonical terms how we get
from Peirce semiotic objective idealism with the universe as a grand argument
to a physical as well as chemical theory of matter. How do we get from the
three universes to the world we are in today, with its physically real problem
of global warming?
Best
Søren
From: Jerry Rhee [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 21. oktober 2016 01:17
To: Søren Brier
Cc: Jon Alan Schmidt; Peirce-L
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Universes and Categories (was Peirce's Cosmology)
Soren, list:
I don’t see why you’re having problems with seeing how this is possible without
a recognition of the independent reality of embodied conscious subjects living
in language and culture.
Could you not simply look to the best example that embodies this integration of
phaneroscopic metaphysics that is combined with ethics, esthetics, logic; that
is combined with tychism, ananchism, agapism (together, synechism); which
supports the triadic process of semiotic through pragmaticism?
Best,
Jerry R
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Søren Brier
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Jon and list
Difficult question. The choice of phenomenology and to combine it with pure
mathematics is in itself metaphysical. Out of this combination develops
phaneroscopic metaphysics, which develop worlds and which is again combined
with ethic, aesthetics and logic as semiotics. This is again combined with
Tychism, synechism and agapism, which are partly independent of the three
categories but supports the development of the triadic process semiotics, and
his pragmaticism, from which a theory of meaning of a sign is developed. But I
still have problems in seeing how this is possible without a recognition of the
independent reality of embodied conscious subjects living in language and
culture.
Søren
From: Jon Alan Schmidt
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: 20. oktober 2016 18:22
To: Søren Brier
Cc: Peirce-L
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Universes and Categories (was Peirce's Cosmology)
Søren, List:
Are you saying that the Categories are phaneroscopic, while the Universes are
metaphysical?
Thanks,
Jon
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Søren Brier
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I suggest that in a phaneroscopic process ontology the categories will develop
into worlds.
Søren
From: Jon Alan Schmidt
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: 20. oktober 2016 15:34
To: Søren Brier
Cc: Peirce-L
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Universes and Categories (was Peirce's Cosmology)
Søren, List:
SB: I think it is fair to say that the categories do form three distinct
different universes.
Just to clarify--are you saying that the categories and the universes are the
same?
Thanks,
Jon
-----------------------------
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]<mailto:[email protected]> . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send
a message not to PEIRCE-L but to
[email protected]<mailto:[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 .
