Ben, List wow, that is interesting! Thanks!
Also these quotes from the fixation of belief fit into the picture: "The method of authority will always govern the mass of mankind; and those who wield the various forms of organized force in the state will never be convinced that dangerous reasoning ought not to be suppressed in some way. If liberty of speech is to be untrammeled from the grosser forms of constraint, then uniformity of opinion will be secured by a moral terrorism to which the respectability of society will give its thorough approval. Following the method of authority is the path of peace. " "For the mass of mankind, then, there is perhaps no better method [authority] than this. If it is their highest impulse to be intellectual slaves, then slaves they ought to remain." Best, Stefan Am 24. November 2016 18:58:41 MEZ, schrieb Benjamin Udell <baud...@gmail.com>: >I've dug a few things up, some of it interesting, some of it also ugly. > >Peirce had more than one mood. > >Last pagragraph in Peirce's review in _The Nation_, Vol. 67, Aug. 25, >1898, 153-155, of _The Psychology of Suggestion_ by Boris Sidis with an > >introduction by William James. >http://www.sidis.net/reviewsuggestion1.htm . >Reprinted in _Contributions to 'The Nation'_ 2:166-9. > > In part iii. the author gives a slight account of some at those > mental epidemics of which several French writers, beginning with > Moreau, have made admirable studies. That the mob self is a > subconscious self is obvious. It is quite true, too, as Dr. Sidis > says, that America is peculiarly subject to epidemic mental > seizures, in fact, it may be said that democracy, as contrasted with > autocracy—and especially government by public opinion and popular > sentiment as expressed in newspapers—is government by the irrational > element of man. To discover how this can be cured, as a practical, > realized result, without the ends of government being narrowed to > the good of an individual or class, is our great problem. Prof. > James seems to think that this part is the best. We will defer to > his judgment, but certainly a great subject here remains virgin > ground for a writer of power. > [End quote] > >That should be read together with the quote - from the same year, 1898 >- >that Clark found in CP 1.654 (in "Practical Concerns and the Wisdom of >Sentiment" in "Vitally Important Topics") >http://www.textlog.de/4277.html : > > Common sense, which is the resultant of the traditional > experience of mankind, witnesses unequivocally that the heart is > more than the head, and is in fact everything in our highest > concerns, thus agreeing with my unproved logical theorem; and those > persons who think that sentiment has no part in common sense forget > that the dicta of common sense are objective facts, not the way some > dyspeptic may feel, but what the healthy, natural, normal democracy > thinks. And yet when you open the next new book on the philosophy of > religion that comes out, the chances are that it will be written by > an intellectualist who in his preface offers you his metaphysics as > a guide for the soul, talking as if philosophy were one of our > deepest concerns. How can the writer so deceive himself? > >_The Nation_ 85 (12 September 1907) 229: NOTES Peirce: _Contributions >to >The Nation_ 3:290 >https://www.google.com/search?q=%22We+fear+that+Mr.+Stickney+is+too+optimistic%22 > > Albert Stickney's "Organized Democracy" (Houghton, Mifflin & Co.) is > one of those radical pleas for political reconstruction which, > however little likely to be adopted or even seriously considered, > are not without usefulness as criticisms of existing political > evils. Mr. Stickney is convinced not only that we have not true > democracy in this country, but also that we cannot have true > democracy so long as the present electoral and administrative > systems prevail. Under popular election of all officials for fixed > terms, joined to the party system, all that the voter can do is to > vote for the candidate of this or that machine; his own personal > choice, if he have one, he cannot possibly register. The remedy Mr. > Stickney urges is the establishment, in local, State, and Federal > Government, of a system of single-headed administration, with the > heads of departments controlled directly by a Legislature the > members of which are popularly chosen by viva voce vote. For tenure > during short terms there would be substituted tenure during good > behavior. Congress, for example, would become a body of one house > with the power of removing the President, but without control over > subordinate appointments. We fear that Mr. Stickney is too > optimistic, and too little appreciative of the difficulty in this > country of achieving reforms by wholesale; but his shrewd > observations and obvious seriousness make his book not > uninteresting. Incidentally, we commend to the curious the > extraordinary punctuation of the volume. > [End quote] > >Of course we know that Peirce believed that people who won't think >ought >to be enslaved. 1908 to Lady Welby >https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Folly+in+politics+cannot+go+farther+than+English+liberalism%22 > >: > > Being a convinced Pragmaticist in Semeiotic, naturally and > necessarily nothing can appear to me sillier than rationalism; and > folly in politics cannot go further than English liberalism. The > people ought to be enslaved; only the slaveholders ought to practice > the virtues that alone can maintain their rule. England will > discover too late that it has sapped the foundations of its culture. > [...] > [End quote] > >Douglas R. Anderson discusses Peirce and politics in the anthology _The > >Rule of Reason_, from which I drew that quote. That passage appears >also >in the Peirce collection _Values in a Universe of Chance_ p. 402 (in >"Science and Religion") >https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Folly+in+politics+cannot+go+farther+than+English+liberalism%22 > >, and therein Peirce goes on to predict that murderous >labor-organizations will become the new ruling class, in which Peirce >sees problems and some reasons for hope. > >Kloesel in 1988 and Norbert Wiley in 1995 and 2003 quoted Peirce from >MS >645 >http://cdclv.unlv.edu/pragmatism/wiley_pragma_demo.html > > If they were to come to know me better they might learn to think me > ultra-conservative. I am, for example, an old-fashioned christian, a > believer in the efficacy of prayer, an opponent of female suffrage > and of universal male suffrage, in favor of letting business-methods > develop without the interference of law, a disbeliever in democracy, > etc. etc. > [End quote] > >Hoopes also quoted most of that last passage in _Community Denied: The >Wrong Turn of Pragmatic Liberalism_, page 19. MS 645 is dated 1909-10, >here is the Robin Catalogue entry: > > 645. How to Define (Definition: 3rd Draught) > A. MS., n.p., December 22 - January 12, 1910, pp. 1-26, with a > variant p. 20. > Three studies distinguished (phaneroscopy, logic, and psychology) > and their order of dependence established. Feeling, volition, and > thought. In regard to feeling, Hume is in error, for he is committed > to the view that vividness is an element of a sensequality. The > three modes of separating the elements of a thought-object are > precision, dissociation, and discrimination. Volition and purpose. > Resemblances as residing in the interpretation of secondary > feelings. CSP's essential conservatism. He warns, however, that > self-criticism, carried too far, leads to exaggerated distrust. > >Best, Ben > >On 11/23/2016 8:24 PM, sb wrote: -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
----------------------------- 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 .
