List, Edwinia:
> On Dec 9, 2017, at 10:02 AM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> My own view is that language is a biological necessity in our species since
> the fact that we do not store our knowledge genetically but socially means
> that we must develop a symbolic referential system for that knowledge base,
> i.e., language.
>
> Language, as a symbolic storage system for knowledge enables our species to
> adapt and change that knowledge very rapidly. Therefore, instead of relying
> on the biological system to adapt our physical existence, we use a
> technological method to provide us with..tools, shelter and so on.
>
> But as to how language began - this is indeed one of the great questions -
> The key is the movement to the symbol [rather than the icon/index].
>
I would suggest several emendations to Edwinia’s comments and suggest a logical
consequence for "the movement to” multiple symbol systems.
> language is a biological necessity in our species
>
languages are cultural necessities for our species.
> the fact that we do not store our knowledge genetically but socially
>
… the fact is that we store our knowledge both genetically and socially
(and that our genetic storage system enables the social system)
> we must develop a symbolic referential system for that knowledge base,
>
culturally, multiple symbolic referential systems emerged over the centuries to
represent that knowledge base
> The key is the movement to the symbol [rather than the icon/index].
>
The keys are the emergence of multiple symbol systems (alphabets, mathematics,
physics, chemistry, genetics, music, and many others) that use multiple indexes
and icons to enable human communications among categories of knowledge within
cultural sub-groups.
Now, for my views on an interpretation of the scientific consequences of the
multiple synthetic symbolizations of nature.
CSP suggests that the emanations that enable human communications (sinsigns)
can categorized as either natural emanations (indexes/icons) or artificial
emanations (indexes/icons) representing symbols and hence symbolic logics.
One aspect of CSP’s writings that appear to me to bound his possible
philosophical influences is the crude attempt to freely substitute natural
emanations with artificial emanations ("what the case is" with "what someone
believes the case to be".)
Cheers
Jerry
“The union of units unite the unity"
-----------------------------
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 .
