Gary R., List:

Of course the Sign *can *be within the bird; what I said was that I think
it does not necessarily *have to* be be within the bird.

I have tried to avoid human semiosis in this conversation, because I
suspect that Edwina and I will have many more disagreements once we go in
that direction.

In a Rhematic Indexical Sinsign, the Sign itself is an Existent
(individual), not a Necessitant (general); so I do not understand what
point you are making about this.


Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman -

On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 9:30 PM, Gary Richmond <>

> 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 <(718)%20482-5690>*
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at .

Reply via email to