A sequential triadic means of actual practical life requires a step past Peirce although all the elements of this sequential means are implicit in his writings. I believe it is the need for an ethical index that must be argued, along with the obvious point that only conscious action that is considered can be said to count as a documentable indication of practical results.
amazon.com/author/stephenrose On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> wrote: > Jon, > > Thanks for the link. > > The duality or complementarity between Thought and Action (Dewey) > or Information and Control (as later generations came to cast it > within cybernetics, computer science, and the systems sciences) > has always been an integral feature of Peirce's Pragmatic Maxim. > Many of my early days on the Peirce List were exhausted in the > effort to communicate the implications of that integration. > But the pull toward Spectator Philosophies (James) is very > persistent and it will no doubt take the exertion of many > wills to overcome their one-sighted bias. > > Regards, > > Jon > > On 3/1/2017 10:59 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote: > >> List: >> >> Part 4, subtitled "Beyond Engineering," is now online at >> http://www.structuremag.org/?p=11107. It discusses how *anyone *can use >> the logic of ingenuity to imagine possibilities, assess alternatives, and >> choose one of them to actualize. I have argued for years that just as >> science is perceived as an especially systematic way of *knowing*, >> likewise >> engineering could be conceived as an especially systematic way of >> *willing*; >> and if this is really the case, then the distinctive reasoning process of >> engineers *should* be paradigmatic for other kinds of decision-making, >> including ethical deliberation. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon >> >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt < >> [email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> List: >>> >>> Part 3, subtitled "Engineering Reasoning," is now online at >>> http://www.structuremag.org/?p=10592. It discusses how engineers use >>> the >>> logic of ingenuity to simulate contingent events with necessary >>> reasoning. >>> This is my attempt to explain Peirce's whole notion of diagrammatic >>> reasoning, using a variety of quotes from his writings. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Jon >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> List: >>>> >>>> I meant to post this back around the first of the month, and then kept >>>> forgetting to do so. Part 2, subtitled "Engineering Analysis," is now >>>> online at http://www.structuremag.org/?p=10490. It discusses how >>>> engineers use the logic of ingenuity to solve real problems by analyzing >>>> fictitious ones. It mostly consists of quotes from and comments on CP >>>> 3.559, which is part of Peirce's 1898 article in *Educational Review*, >>>> "The Logic of Mathematics in Relation to Education" ( >>>> http://www.pragmaticism.net/works/csp_ms/P00653.pdf). It is the >>>> passage >>>> that opened up to me this whole understanding of engineering thinking, >>>> when >>>> I first encountered it in the volume edited by Matthew E. Moore, >>>> *Philosophy >>>> of Mathematics: Selected Writings*. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jon >>>> >>>> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> List: >>>>> >>>>> In an effort to apply Peirce's thought to my profession of engineering, >>>>> as well as introduce it to my fellow practitioners, I have written a >>>>> four-part series of articles under this heading for *STRUCTURE* >>>>> magazine. >>>>> Part 1, subtitled "Engineering Design," appears in the September issue >>>>> and >>>>> is also posted online. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.STRUCTUREmag.org/?p=10373 >>>>> >>>>> In summary, I am defining "the logic of ingenuity" as the process of >>>>> (abductively) creating a diagrammatic representation of a problem and >>>>> its >>>>> proposed solution, and then (deductively) working out the necessary >>>>> consequences, such that this serves as an adequate substitute for >>>>> (inductively) evaluating the actual situation. This first installment >>>>> discusses how engineers use it to design particular artifacts for >>>>> specific >>>>> purposes, and connects it with many of my previous writings for the >>>>> same >>>>> publication. >>>>> >>>>> Any and all feedback is welcome! >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA >>>>> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman >>>>> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> > > -- > > inquiry into inquiry: https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/ > academia: https://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey > oeiswiki: https://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey > isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA > 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 .
