Edwina, List: ET: But again, you can write about 'the elements of which it is composed' . Here, 'elements' does indeed refer to 'categories'.
So you agree with Gary F. and me now? Jon S. On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Jon, list: > > Again, I reject your linear time-phased reading of Peirce; I read Peirce > in a holistic manner. > > But again, you can write about 'the elements of which it is composed' . > Here, 'elements' does indeed refer to 'categories'. [By the way, I can't > find that quote in EP2:362ff]. > > And most certainly, the categories do belong to the field of > consciousness. Again, this is not confined to human consciousness. > > Edwina > > On Tue 05/12/17 3:39 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt [email protected] sent: > > Edwina, List: > > According to Peirce, identification of the three Categories is the outcome > of analyzing the phaneron into the elements of which it is composed; or > more precisely, into the forms of indecomposable elements of which it is > composed (cf. EP 2:362ff; 1905). > > As for "elements of consciousness," that phrase appears in several > writings in the Collected Papers, all considerably earlier than > 1903--1.550 (1867), 5.241-247 (1868), 5.295 (1868), 5.395 (1878), 1.382 > (1887-8), 6.267 (1892), and 7.542-3&580 (undated). It also shows up in a > 1904 letter (8.290), but there it is being quoted from someone else. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Mike, list - I agree with you. I don't think that examining the >> categorical signs of the phaneron can be understood as " analysis into >> the elements of which they are composed". >> >> Peirce referred to the 'elements of consciousness' - a key term is >> 'consciousness' [not necessarily human] but I understand this phrase as >> 'elements of received interaction. ' I agree that it is a >> 'generality'. And agree with your focus on 'an instance of something in >> Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness'. >> >> Edwina >> >
----------------------------- 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 .
