John S., List:
Peirce's comment about "every intelligence which can learn from experience"
is from an 1896 article in *The Monist* entitled, "The Regenerated Logic."
Although he was referring to the kinds of observations that are the subject
matter of philosophy in general, he went on to add, "Logic may be defined
as the science of the laws of the stable establishment of beliefs" (CP
3.428-429). Since beliefs are habits, and habits are Final Interpretants,
one could plausibly adapt this formulation to define semeiotic as the
science of the laws of the stable establishment of habits. In conjunction
with the metaphysical position that Peirce termed "objective idealism" a
few years earlier, this would seem to generalize semeiosis as governing
both mind and matter ("effete mind"), since the primordial "law of mind"
just is the "law of habit" (CP 6.21-25, EP 1:291-293; 1891).
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 1:06 PM, John F Sowa <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 1/22/2018 10:55 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>
>> I didn’t realize that you were looking for advocacy of biosemiotics in
>> Peirce’s writings. I don’t think he ever used the term,
>>
>
> I was asking about the development of Peirce's thought (as shown
> by the content and dates of his MSS), not about the explicit word.
> The word zoosemiotics was coined by Sebeok in the 1960s. The word
> biosemiotics came later. It's highly unlikely that Peirce said it.
>
> As I said in the last line of my note:
>
>> He must have been thinking about generalizing semiosis long
>> before 1903. Where can we find the evidence?
>>
>
> In the excerpt below, I mentioned his article on logical machines,
> various anecdotes, and knowledge of Darwin. Those ideas could have
> led to earlier, possibly fragmentary, anticipations.
>
> But more evidence -- even hints, suggestions, or musements --
> could clarify the development of his thoughts.
>
> John
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
>
> In 1887, he published an article about logical machines. Among other
> things, he cited Jacquard looms (early 1800s) and Babbage's machines. Ada
> Lovelace wrote her memoirs about programming them in 1843. If machines
> could use signs, there would be no logical objection to claiming that
> animals could use signs.
>
> He talked about the use of signs by any "scientific intelligence"
> -- for which the only criterion is the ability to learn from experience.
> His anecdotes about dogs and parrots showed how they learn from
> experience. He also mentioned other kinds of animals in various writings.
> His principle of continuity and his knowledge of Darwin's studies (1859)
> would lead him to extend at least some subset of semiosis to animals.
>
> He must have been thinking about generalizing semiosis long before 1903.
> Where can we find the evidence?
>
-----------------------------
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 .
