Edwina, List: But that is not the form of argument in view here at all; it is more like the following, as I understand it.
1. The members of the Holy Family were destitute in a foreign land. 2. I feel compassion for the members of the Holy Family. 3. Therefore, I ought to feel compassion for anyone who is destitute in a foreign land. 4. Modern refugees are destitute in a foreign land. 5. Therefore, I ought to feel compassion for modern refugees. #3 is a normative hypothesis, a plausible generalization, not a deductively valid conclusion from #1-2; but once #3 is accepted, #5 *is *a deductively valid conclusion from #3-4. That is precisely why this is characterized as an argument from *analogy*, which Peirce described as "the inference that a not very large collection of objects which agree in various respects may very likely agree in another respect. For instance, the earth and Mars agree in so many respects that it seems not unlikely they may agree in being inhabited" (CP 1.69; c. 1896). In this case, the Holy Family and modern refugees agree in the (iconic?) respect of being destitute in a foreign land, such that it seems not unlikely they may agree in the (rhematic?) respect of being proper objects of my compassion. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Jerry, list - but apart from the perhaps-not-quite-accurate analogy of > 'destitute in a foreign land' - don't you consider that it is rationally > dangerous to set up an analogy that might imply that the attributes of one > set can possibly be fully applied to the second set? > > Human compassion has nothing to do with this attempt at analogous > comparison and to me, it doesn't make sense to suggest that To Make Such An > Analogy is an Act-of-Compassion. > > It's a similar false analogy as in the common logical fallacy of: > All cats are animals > All dogs are animals > Therefore, all dogs are cats. > Edwina > > On Thu 28/12/17 1:47 PM , Jerry LR Chandler [email protected] > sent: > > Peter, List: > > Is it possible that what is missing from this philosophical discussion is > simple human compassion? > > The Holy Family were destitute in a foreign land. > > in parallel sentence structure for the image (icon) without regard to the > facts not stated of the two images, > > The refuges are destitute in a foreign land. > > Of course, the concept human compassion is seldom an acceptable argument > in semeiotics, or is it? > > Cheers > > Jerry > > On Dec 28, 2017, at 8:33 AM, Skagestad, Peter <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Listers, > > I have a somewhat unusual question. My sister is writing an Art History > thesis on nativity scenes and their contemporary relevance. An example is > one at a street mission in Trondheim, Norway, depicting the Holy Family as > present-day refugees from the Middle East. Now the question is what, if > anything, might semiotics have to say about such depiction? The answer may > be obvious, but it escapes me, at least for the moment. Any suggestions? > > Cheers, > > Peter > >
----------------------------- 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 .
