BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}Jon, list
With regard to your reminding us that 'we always need to pay
attention to when Peirce wrote something - that is how you read
Peirce. I don't do this and read him as a whole not in a linear
fashion.
Your bold font of Peirce's use of 'composed' is dissimilar to Gary
F's comment and use of the term.
My comment - and I think I was specific in this - was not about what
Peirce wrote but about what Gary F. wrote.
"not about classification of phenomena but analysis into the
elements of which they are composed, namely Firstness, Secondness and
Thirdness"
I don't see the categories as 'elements' but as, 'organization of
experience/phaneron'.
Edwina
On Tue 05/12/17 2:56 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt [email protected]
sent:
Edwina, List:
We always need to pay attention to when Peirce wrote something. CP
1.409 is from 1887 or 1888, and Lowell 3 is from 1903; Gary F.'s
point is that Peirce's terminology evolved between these two
writings. As for "composed," he stated the following.
CSP: I have taken no pains to make this promiscuous list of
properties of fact complete, having only cared that it should be
sufficient to enable us to compare the characters of fact with those
of duality and thus ultimately to attain an understanding of why all
phenomena should be composed of quality, fact, and law. (CP 1.440;
c. 1896, bold added)
CSP: All the elements of experience belong to three classes, which,
since they are best defined in terms of numbers, may be termed
Kainopythagorean categories. Namely, experience is composed of 1st,
monadic experiences, or simples, being elements each of such a nature
that it might without inconsistency be what it is though there were
nothing else in all experience; 2nd, dyadic experiences, or
recurrences, each a direct experience of an opposing pair of objects;
3rd, triadic experiences, or comprehensions, each a direct experience
which connects other possible experiences. (CP 7.528; undated, bold
added)
The Categories are, as Peirce himself said in multiple places, the
only three types of "indecomposable elements" that we find in every
phenomenon. This is "reductionistic" only if saying that all matter
is composed of 118 elements is "reductionistic." In fact, according
to Peirce, " composition is itself a triadic relationship, between
the two (or more) components and the composite whole" (CP 6.321;
1909).
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USAProfessional Engineer, Amateur
Philosopher, Lutheran Laymanwww.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt [1] -
twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt [2]
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote:
With regard to your comment:
"not about classification of phenomena but analysis into the
elements of which they are composed, namely Firstness, Secondness and
Thirdness."
I don't see that 'elements' or 'categories' means 'of which they are
composed, which is reductionistic. After all, a basic understanding
of the term 'element', is as 'a component or constituent of a whole'.
But I don't see that the categories are an analysis of the elements of
which phenomena are composed'.
I understand Peirce's use of 'element' to refer to the nature of,
or basic mode of organization of that 'whole'.
After all, Peirce's “three elements are active in the world,
first, chance; second, law; and third, habit-taking” (CP 1.409) As
active, they cannot refer to 'bits' or 'components of a whole'.
Chance is a state of a phenomena - and thus, not a component or
'bit'. Law is a rule of that phenomena and again, not a component.
Habit-taking is a process...not a component or bit of a whole.
Edwina Taborsky
Links:
------
[1] http://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt
[2] http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
[3]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'[email protected]\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
-----------------------------
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 .
