Jon, Edwina, list,

Jon wrote:

I still think that the IO-R-II triad is within the *Sign*, not necessarily
within the bird (Receiver), but we can set that disagreement aside for
now.  More to the point--in your view, does semiosis *only *take place
within the bird?  Is there no *other *semiosis going on, in which the loud
sound plays the role of the Representamen?
 me.


Cannot the Sign be "within the bird," Jon? It seems to me that there is
perhaps a "sign of a sign" situation going on here. The IO-R-II is within
the sign which is within the bird (or the person). I think I might agree
with Edwina (if I understand this correctly), that the Sign of central
importance to our analysis, even if it doesn't "*only* take place within
the bird," indeed *does* takes place within the bird and the sign (of which
it is, perhaps, a "sign of a sign"--but that's another analysis). (Btw, I
think that perhaps it's better for the purposes of this analysis to
consider human semiosis as I think this might help simplify and clarify the
analysis because we can't really know the mind of a bird although we can
take a stab at the mind of a man/woman).

Jon wrote:

How can the Representamen be classified as *general *(Legisign or Type) in
a scenario where an *individual *sound leads an *individual *bird to the
*individual *action of flight?  I thought you were saying in your previous
post that it is a Rhematic Indexical Sinsign, which makes much more sense
to me.


But aren't we *also* concerned, Jon, with individual semiosis? "A *rhematic
indexical sinsign* (such as a cry in the street) is a sign that directs
attention to the object by which it is caused." CSP

Wouldn't this 'work' for *any* bird say in a flock of birds?

OK, hazy thinking for now. But circling around this seems to be of
potential value imo, at least for me.

Best,

Gary R

[image: Gary Richmond]

*Gary Richmond*
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*Communication Studies*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
*718 482-5690*

On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:12 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Edwina, List:
>
> I still think that the IO-R-II triad is within the *Sign*, not
> necessarily within the bird (Receiver), but we can set that disagreement
> aside for now.  More to the point--in your view, does semiosis *only *take
> place within the bird?  Is there no *other *semiosis going on, in which
> the loud sound plays the role of the Representamen?
>
> How can the Representamen be classified as *general *(Legisign or Type)
> in a scenario where an *individual *sound leads an *individual *bird to
> the *individual *action of flight?  I thought you were saying in your
> previous post that it is a Rhematic Indexical Sinsign, which makes much
> more sense to me.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon S.
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 8:22 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> The key action of semiosis that I am examining takes place within the
>> bird....the IO-Representamen-II.
>>
>> A Representamen is always internal to the triad.
>>
>> The loud sound is both the Dynamic Object - which causes the bird to
>> react and..a version of that loud sound within the bird's neurological
>> system is the IO.
>>
>> What mediates between the tree and the bird? The action of semiosis:
>> which is triadic - : O-R-I, or DO-IO-R-II-DI.
>>
>> The sound - which has affected the bird - is the Dynamic Object.
>>
>> The Representamen is the action of mediation within the Triad; it doesn't
>> stand alone.
>>
>> ------------------------
>>
>> A deaf bird would see the other bird flee; that would be the DO to that
>> deaf bird- the bird's flight.
>>
>> Then, the deaf bird's IO would be its neurological impression of that
>> other flight; mediated by its Representamen of knowledge of that
>> adrenalin rush...to its own II and then - its own DI or flight.
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> No - I don't consider that the Representamen in these 'bird cases' is in
>> a mode of Secondness. It's in a mode of Thirdness - the knowledge base,
>> both biological and learned, of that bird.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>>  Edwina
>>
>> On Sun 04/02/18 8:42 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt jonalanschm...@gmail.com sent:
>>
>> Edwina, List:
>>
>> Just a few comments--not to start another argument, just to highlight
>> more differences in our views that are becoming apparent.
>>
>> The loud sound involves the behavior of matter, which is effete mind, and
>> mediates between the falling tree and the fleeing bird; so I am still not
>> seeing why it could not be a Representamen if the scenario is analyzed in a
>> certain way.  Are you positing some kind of discontinuity in the
>> semiosis during the chain of events from the falling of the tree, to the
>> loud sound that it causes, to the impinging of the propagating sound waves
>> on the bird, to its resulting neural pattern, to its flight?  Otherwise, it
>> seems to me that each of these could be analyzed as a
>> Representamen--even the bird's flight, which might signal to another bird
>> (say, a deaf one) that it should flee, as well.
>>
>> As I have stated a couple of times before, I consider our example to be
>> one in which all of the correlates are Existents (2ns); i.e., per the 1903
>> Sign classification, it is an Indexical Sinsign, although I am inclined to
>> agree that it is Rhematic, rather than Dicent.  The bird's
>> reaction/interpretation of the Sign is the individual action of flight;
>> the habit was already in place before the loud sound ever happened.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jon S.
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 6:38 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 1]Jon - to me, the Representamen is an act of mediation; it transforms
>>> the data from the IO [Immediate Object] into an Interpretation...
>>>
>>> So- to me, the loud sound is incoming sensate data; It doesn't act
>>> as MIND, transforming this sound into some interpretation of it.
>>>
>>> I am, in the above, assuming that the Representamen is in a mode of
>>> Thirdness [Mind]. For example, as
>>>
>>> O-R-I or a Rhematic Indexical Legisign, an individual interpretation of
>>> local stimuli as referenced to a general rule.
>>>
>>> So- the bird's reaction/interpretation of the sound..is the habit of
>>> flight.
>>>
>>> But- the Representamen can be in other modes.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ---------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> 2] Now..let's see..what if it's instead in a mode of Firstness.
>>>
>>> this would have the triad [O-R-I] as a Rhematic Iconic Qualisign- where
>>> all three parts of the Sign are in a mode of Firstness. Peirce's example
>>> was that 'feeling of redness'; this example would be a feeling of sound. A
>>> local and internal non-interpreted, non-describe individual state.
>>>
>>> 3] What if the Representamen were in a mode of Secondness. There are
>>> three classes where the R is in a mode of Secondness:
>>>
>>> O-R-I   or 1-2-1 A Rhematic Iconic Sinsign. An individual diagram; an
>>> iconic non-analyzed description of a sensation
>>>
>>> O-R-I or 2-2-1  A Rhematic Indexical Sinsign .  A spontaneous cry. a
>>> local non-intentional reaction to a local and direct indexical stimuli.
>>>
>>> O-R-I or 2-2-2- a Dicent Indexical Sinsign; a mechanical reaction.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> So - in the above - I could see that the Representamen could be in a
>>> mode of Secondness..as a Rhematic Indexical Sinsign.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------
>>>
>>> But- in none of the above - do I define the loud sound as the
>>> Representamen, since I maintain that its role is mediation.
>>>
>>> Edwina
>>>
>>> On Sun 04/02/18 7:13 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt jonalanschm...@gmail.com
>>> sent:
>>>
>>> Edwina, List:
>>>
>>> Yes, again, we have very different definitions of "Representamen."  Just
>>> to clarify--are you saying that in your view, the loud sound cannot be
>>> treated as the Representamen in any semiotic analysis of this
>>> scenario?  If so, why not?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jon S.
>>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would disagree. The falling of the tree is a full Sign
>>>> [O-R-I]....with the actual fall as the Dynamic Interpretant. The
>>>> wind-taking-down-the-tree might by a Dynamic Object to the tree...which
>>>> then reacts by falling [DI].
>>>>
>>>> But within the bird, what affects the senses of the bird - is that loud
>>>> sound. That is the external Dynamic Object to that situation. The Immediate
>>>> Object is whatever sensual data is felt within the bird from that sound.
>>>> The Representamen is a process of mediating this sensate data into an
>>>> interpretation [II and DI].
>>>>
>>>> Edwina
>>>>
>>>> On Sun 04/02/18 4:08 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt jonalanschm...@gmail.com
>>>> sent:
>>>>
>>>> Helmut, List:
>>>>
>>>> In my view, we can indeed take the loud sound to be the Representamen,
>>>> as I initially suggested--noting again that my definition differs
>>>> significantly from Edwina's.  This leads to a different analysis in which
>>>> the Dynamic Object is the falling of the tree that causes the sound,
>>>> with the other terms reassigned accordingly.  Sign-action is mediation,
>>>> even though the Sign itself is indeed the First Correlate of the
>>>> genuine triadic relation that has the Object as its Second Correlate and
>>>> the Interpretant as its Third Correlate (cf. EP 2:290; 1903).
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
>>>> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
>>>> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
>>>>
>>>>
>
> -----------------------------
> PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
> PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
> peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L
> but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the
> BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .




Reply via email to