Edwina, List: ET: A large issue is the definition of 'sign'. Is it the representamen alone? Or is it the triad of the Immediate Object-Represntamen-Immediate Interpretant? Or is it even larger - and includes the Dynamic Object?
I believe that our recent joint resolution to use "Sign" only for the internal Oi-R-Ii triad could go a long way toward clearing up this particular terminological difficulty. The external Dynamic Object is not part of the Sign itself, it is something distinct that is in a single triadic relation with both the Sign and the external Dynamic Interpretant. ET: My problem is that I can't figure out what ONE triadic Relation means. I can understand the 'umbrella image' of the triad [1.347], which is something like a three spoked umbrella: -<.....but one can see even from this that there are THREE spokes or Relations in that image. Lake Gary R., my understanding of that particular diagram is that its spokes do not correspond to *three *distinct relations; instead, it represents *one *triadic relation with three distinct *subjects *(correlates). The three-pronged shape is intended to convey that none of the correlates is in an *independent *relation with either of the other correlates; the *triadic *relation is *not *reducible to multiple *dyadic *relations. The basic idea is the same as when the triadic Sign relation is represented as a single proposition, _____ stands for _____ to _____; rather than three relations, there is one relation with three correlates, which correspond to the three blanks. Another well-known example is _____ gives _____ to _____; giving is not a combination of *three *relations, it is *one *triadic relation. ET: I can even imagine ONE Sign SET - made up of that image as outlined by JAS, made up of the Immediate Object-Representamen-Immediate Interpretant - and this triadic Sign would interact with the Dynamic Object - which is itself made up of a triad of an Immediate Object-Represntamen-Immediate Interpretant...and forms a Dynamic Interpretant, which is itself made up of an Immediate Object-Representamen-Immediate Interpretant. This is a good example of how restricting the term "Sign" to the *internal *Oi-R-Ii triad might help clarify things. There is one such Sign at each "node" of the *external *Sign relation--the Sign itself, the Dynamic Object that determines it, and the Dynamic Interpretant that it (possibly) determines. Again, the latter is not one triad that consists of three relations, it is one triadic relation with three correlates. Is that helpful at all? Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, that's what I've been mulling over for years - where I think that > there are three relations rather than one triadic relation. > > A large issue is the definition of 'sign'. Is it the representamen alone? > Or is it the triad of the Immediate Object-Represntamen-Immediate > Interpretant? Or is it even larger - and includes the Dynamic Object? > > My problem is that I can't figure out what ONE triadic Relation means. I > can understand the 'umbrella image' of the triad [1.347], which is > something like a three spoked umbrella: -<.....but one can see even from > this that there are THREE spokes or Relations in that image. They may > certainly interact and affect each other, but - this doesn't reduce them to > ONE triadic Relation. I simply can't 'imagize' what 'one triadic Relation' > would look like or how it would function. > > I can imagine ONE Sign SET [not a Relation], as an irreducible set, made > up of three Relations. > > I can even imagine ONE Sign SET - made up of that image as outlined by > JAS, made up of the Immediate Object-Representamen-Immediate Interpretant - > and this triadic Sign would interact with the Dynamic Object - which is > itself made up of a triad of an Immediate Object-Represntamen-Immediate > Interpretant...and forms a Dynamic Interpretant, which is itself made up of > an Immediate Object-Representamen-Immediate Interpretant. > > But- that's making me dizzy and I'll stop. > > Edwina > -- > This message is virus free, protected by Primus - Canada's > largest alternative telecommunications provider. > > http://www.primus.ca >
----------------------------- 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 .
