Jon S, list,
Perhaps I am making more of Peirce's comment regarding 'a sign of a sign'
than you think is justified (one more individual, the other more general as
I see it). It seems to me that your emphasis in consideration of the
Rhematic Indexical Sinsign on it's being *existent *is but half the story.
You seem to me to look at the sign from 'without', while I tend to look at
it from 'within'.
But I'll reflect on all of this. I still am thinking that, for me, human
semiosis might help clarify these matters better than the non-human,
non-cognitive one. I see you as emphasizing the external, existential sign,
whereas I always tend to turn to the cognitive one (as at least
springboard). In "a sign of a sign" your emphasis seems to me to be the
former, mine the latter.
[image: Gary Richmond]
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 10:45 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com>
> 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
> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2018 at 9:30 PM, Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com>
>> 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?
>> 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.
>> 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 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