> On Mar 13, 2017, at 7:00 AM, Jon Awbrey <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> I think John Sowa's remarks about the “major failures caused by ignoring
> [Peirce]”
> and Jerry Chandler's remarks about later readings serving as a “Procrustian
> bed
> for CSP's concepts” are very apt in this context, and I will have more to say
> in that regard if I can get to it.
I think so too, but I think we should make explicit what other doctrines Peirce
held that was different from the mainstream of philosophy lead to these
differences. Off the top of my head I think you have to mention the following:
scholastic realism vs. nominalism
modal realism vs. actualism (primarily for the late Peirce although with the
pragmatic maxim he moved to counterfactuals reasonably early)
externalism vs. internalism
signs vs. thoughts in a mind (i.e. the interpretant need not be a human mind)
verification as meaning vs. verification as truth
There’s probably some others but those five see the key differences that make
terms like correspondence or coherence misleading at best.
-----------------------------
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 .
