>"As for myself, I have never agreed with anyone else's paraphrase of my >opinions. I always ask people to quote my exact words and not attribute their >interpretations to me. I would give Peirce the same benefit of the doubt."
Excellent. As it should be. I cannot comment on the truth or otherwise of Eugene’s defamations of Peirce. But one thing has to be made absolutely clear... this is the sort of thing that extremists in America are resorting to now. They’re getting desperate. They deliberately take things out of context, they lie and they fabricate. They defame their opposition, and now it looks like they’re even defaming historical figures. If one is to take a defamer seriously, then they need to check the claims made... don’t take them as given. What people with an agenda typically do... they take things out of context, making unsubstantiated assertions, relying on the assumption that they won’t be checked. If anyone is going to follow through on this, then please do it properly. Did Peirce say mean things once? Maybe. So have I. So have most of you. Did he change later? Maybe. So have I. So have most of you. But someone with an agenda is unlikely to admit to inconvenient truths... they'll omit inconvenient words, or sentences, or paragraphs, or later reports, or updates. The safest assumption... it’s just what they do. Regards -----Original Message----- From: John F Sowa [mailto:s...@bestweb.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 11:02 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Scientific inquiry does not involve matters Gene, Edwina, and Stephen, I have been traveling and working on some tight deadlines. So I have not been able to read, much less comment on, most of the discussions. But I am reluctant to make long chains of questionable inferences from Peirce's writings and get into heated arguments about the different interpretations. I'd just like to make one observation about Thomas Gradgrind, whom Peirce mentioned in a remark that Gene quoted (March 12): > The Reign of Terror was very bad; but now the Gradgrind banner has > been this century long flaunting in the face of heaven, with an > insolence to provoke the very skies to scowl and rumble. Soon a flash > and quick peal will shake economists quite out of their complacency, > too late. The twentieth century, in its latter half, shall surely see > the deluge-tempest burst upon the social order > -- to clear upon a world as deep in ruin as that greed-philosophy has > long plunged it into guilt. No post-thermidorian high jinks then!” > (Evolutionary Love, 1893, 6.292). In Dickens' novel _Hard Times_, Gradgrind was, among other things, a teacher who summarized his educational philosophy in one phrase: "To fill the little pitchers full of facts". For Peirce, that slogan is extreme nominalism, which was at least as evil as the gospel of greed. But in the novel, Gradgrind was a more complex character who had redeeming qualities and a change of heart and life at the end. For a brief summary of Gradgrind's portrayal by Dickens, see https://www.shmoop.com/hard-times-dickens/thomas-gradgrind.html Since Gradgrind is a complex character and Peirce is even more complex, I have serious doubts about any attempt to make stronger inferences about Peirce's character or opinions than he stated explicitly. As for myself, I have never agreed with anyone else's paraphrase of my opinions. I always ask people to quote my exact words and not attribute their interpretations to me. I would give Peirce the same benefit of the doubt. John
----------------------------- 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 .