> On Nov 2, 2016, at 3:47 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > At first glance, it seems to me that mapping John 1:1 to Peirce's Categories > gives us something like, "In the beginning was the Word [Thirdness], and the > Word was with God [Secondness], and the Word was God [Firstness]." >
I’ll just confess my ignorance here since there are different ways to read that and I couldn’t find anything on how Peirce did. His beliefs are idiocyncratic enough I’m loath to simply impose on him traditional views of the Trinity or the Logos. After all this was also a point where Eckhart and Duns Scotus differed as well. (Is the Father Being or Intellect among other matters) Making things more complicated are the various ways “logos” can be used. Scotus often uses it as reason. Unfortunately I don’t have my CP handy so I’ll see if I have time to look this up at home. (I still need to find that Ransdell paper on love too — although I’m coming to think I conflated it in my memory with a paper of Michael Ventimiglia, “Reclaiming the Peircean Cosmology: Existential Abduction and the Growth of Self")
----------------------------- 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 .
