Jon A, List
Yes - there are indeed links between them. The thing about both, is their
focus on 'cognition' [which I term semiosis in Peirce] - and that includes
the operation of Mind within the physico-chemical realm [eg, crystals in
Peirce].....but the operation of Mind, within the semiosic triadic Sign - as
ACTIVE within the creation of itself and of others. That is, Peirce, in my
reading, doesn't set up an abstract philosophy of life, nor does he set up a
mechanistic outline of this life - but sets up an agential, differentiating,
evolving, complex process of Mind/Matter.
In GSB- you have this same focus on the dynamic and evolving cognitive
entity [which in Peirce could be a man, an insect, a flower, a crystal]
differentiating itself from....not itself...which is actually an act of
creation - of both.
I won't do more..My point is only that Peirce's semiosis is a constructive
action...of everything that exists.
Edwina
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Awbrey" <[email protected]>
To: "Peirce List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2016 5:00 PM
Subject: [PEIRCE-L] CSP + GSB
Edwina, List,
I encountered C.S. Peirce and G. Spencer Brown
about the same time, early in my freshman year,
and I wrote a lot about the links between them
in my earliest days on the Peirce List.
Both CSP and GSB appreciated the importance of the
dual interpretations of logical graphs, entitative
and existential, which exhibit by the way a certain
analogy with the dualities in projective geometry.
I'll just leave it at that for now until I get more time ...
Regards,
Jon
On 11/7/2016 2:54 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote:
> Jeff, list:
>
> Yes, I think that Peirce's rejection of
> Hegel's 'Absolute One' provides us with
> a richer, and more accurate outline of
> reality as complex — and I agree that
> Thirdness is relative.
>
> That relative nature refers to the operative nature
> of Thirdness, while the operative nature of both
> Firstness and Secondness is their capacity for
> non-relational interaction. Firstness is just
> 'absolute' as itself, while Secondness is a
> brute action that relies on no mediation.
>
> I am sure you are familiar with Spencer Brown's Laws of Form;
> his concept that 'a universe comes into being when a space is
> severed or taken apart' 1972, v. And, Spencer Brown's four
> classes of statements: true, false, meaningless and imaginary.
> I wonder how these relate to the Categories, both genuine
> and degenerate and also, to theories of truth and logic.
> As Spencer-Brown writes, 'If the weakness of present-day
> science is that it centres around existence, the weakness
> of present-day logic is that it centres around truth" [101].
>
> That is "A theorem is no more proved by logic and computation
> than a sonnet is written by grammar and rhetoric" 102.
>
> And, "we cannot escape the fact that the world we know is
> constructed in order [and thus in such as way as to be able]
> to see itself.... But in order to do so, evidently it must
> first cut itself up into at least one state which sees, and
> at least one other state which is seen. In this severed and
> mutilated condition, whatever it sees is only partially itself"
> 105.
>
> I don't mean to turn the thread to Spencer Brown, but
> his work [which does reference Peirce] seems to align
> with some of Peirce's focus on the metaphysics of the
> world. The paragraph above, to me, recalls 1.412, that
> 'explosion' of matter at the beginning of the universe;
> and also, the lines on the blackboard.
>
> Edwina
>
--
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
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 .
