List,
sorry for the off-topic-ness of this, but at this point I am wondering quite muchly, why these anti-body-dogmatists, who disrespect the human body and its urges so much (I had read something about a red letter "A" for adultery embroidered by a woman on her dress to be worn all her life, just because she has had a rudimentary sex life after her husband had left her), I mean, these rigid protestants, pietists, maybe catholics too, why ever do they want to take their so disgusting body with them when they go to heaven?
Best,
Helmut
 
30. November 2017 um 14:19 Uhr
Von: [email protected]
 

List,

 

For those unfamiliar with Biblical language, “translated” in this context means “taken up to heaven bodily” (which happened to the prophet Elijah in that universe). An interesting choice to show how lines of identity work inside a cut. But some example like this is necessary to “unpack” Peirce’s opening sentence here, “The more you scribe on the bottom of a cut, the less you assert.” This is very important in the interpretation of beta graphs.

 

In the example where a single line of identity connects the two rhemes, Peirce reads it as “Either nobody is translated or if anybody is translated, that person does not return to earth.” But strictly speaking, it could also be read the other way round: “Either nobody returns to earth, or if anybody does, that person is not translated.” We don’t read it that way because we take for granted a temporal order that prevents anybody “returning” from a place where they haven’t gone. This is an example of how semantics can affect our reading of system meant to be purely formal (i.e. all syntax, no semantics).

 

In the last two diagrams, lines of identity are permitted to extend to the cut from outside and inside. But why can’t we simply have one line of identity that crosses the cut to join the spot inside with the spot outside? This question — which is, if you’ll pardon the _expression_, crucial in the development of EGs — will be addressed in 2.17.

 

Gary f.

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 29-Nov-17 08:59
To: [email protected]
Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Lowell Lecture 2.16

 

Continuing from Lowell Lecture 2.15,

https://fromthepage.com/jeffdown1/c-s-peirce-manuscripts/ms-455-456-1903-lowell-lecture-ii/display/13624

 

 

The more you scribe on the bottom of a cut, the less you assert. Thus

means: It is not true that somebody returns to earth nor is it true that somebody is translated. But

merely says that both are not true. That is one or [the] other is false. Either nobody returns to earth or else nobody is translated. Add to this a line of identity joining the two

and still less is asserted. Either nobody is translated or if anybody is translated, that person does not return to earth.

Now take this

That means somebody is a prophet but nobody is translated. If we continue the outer line to the cut, it will make no difference

for no significance attaches to the shape of the line. If, however, the inner line be extended to join the point on the cut, much less is asserted

This means: Somebody is a prophet and this person is not translated; that is Some prophet is not translated.

 

http://gnusystems.ca/Lowell2.htm }{ Peirce’s Lowell Lectures of 1903

https://fromthepage.com/jeffdown1/c-s-peirce-manuscripts/ms-455-456-1903-lowell-lecture-ii

 

----------------------------- 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 .




Reply via email to