off-list Jon,
I just read parts 3 and 4 of your series in succession. What a fine accomplishment. Perhaps if more scholars thought with your acuity and wrote with your clarity and efficiency (succinctness), Peirce studies might be much further along* in the world generally* than they are now. This is also to suggest that I have no problem with the notion of the "popularization" of Peircean pragmatism and semeiotic as long as his ideas aren't distorted in some limited personal use (the various 'thieves of Peirce' such as Charles Morris. Walker Percy--whom I may never forgive for setting Ken Ketner in the wrong=literary direction in writing his probably never to be completed proposed 3 voluem autobiography (stet) of Peirce as he was in the position and had all the tools, including the philosophical and mathematical ones, to write a definitive biography). But for now, and just speaking of your series, congratulations on an extraordinary accomplishment, a line of argumentation which, if followed and fully absorbed--that is, put into practice--might improve many a ones thinking *and willing*. It certainly is doing that for me! I'd like to write more in response to it on the list, but I spent al good portion of yesterday hangin' with the members of our NYC New Metaphysical Club, then the late afternoon commenting on a paper on truth and the nominalism vs realism question which Cathy Legg had posted on Academia for comment, an excellent effort to move philosophers in the direction of Peircean realism. Yet, as Kathleen Hull commented, culture as a whole (including philosophy of course) is dominated by nominalism. Hull wrote: "We are all nominalists, culturally;" and while this is not literally so--there are some notable exceptions--making the case for Peirce's brand of realism continues to be an uphill battle. In any event, I've little time to post anything today as I need to study some Zalamea in order to make sure that I can follow at least some of what he's saying this evening. The guy is so cutting edge that I think it will take even the mathematical community quite a while to catch up with him. In his precis on the Semiotics Web site he sets up three pairs of triads and I want see if they match up with Peirce's categories--when I first looked at that blurb I thought that they did not--so studying them is a principal task of my afternoon. I'm glad that Jeff suggested our setting up a way to attend remotely. Are you planning to GoToMeeting? The members of the NMC all agree that the paper you linked to (== the first four chapters of Fernando's book on continuity), might make an excellent slow read on list, and I hope to discuss this with him after his talk this evening. Of the several suggestions I've received for a slow read, I think that Z's paper makes the most sense for now especially since, as Ben mentioned at our NMC lunch meeting yesterday, that there seems to be quite a bit of interest in continuity on the list. As you probably know--and may even agree--I see Z is the modern master on the topic. So, again, thanks for your 4 paper series (I'll read the first two installments again when I get the chance) and especially those last two papers (btw, I began the 3rd this morning thinking it was the 4th, and am very glad I did). More sooner--I hope--than later. Lots to talk about. Cheers, Gary PS While the hip replacement is in good shape, I'm still on crutches because of the muscle tear in my thigh. I have a feeling it will be a long time healing. James is going to drive me one way, but I'm going to hazard public transportation going there. Wish me luck! [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* *Communication Studies* *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* *C 745* *718 482-5690* On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> 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 >>>> >>> > > ----------------------------- > 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 .
