Hello Mike, List,

I was searching online for some information about the Peirce manuscripts and 
came across your website with information about how those who are new to the 
scene might get started reading Peirce. At one point, you describe an ongoing 
transcription project that is using crowdsourcing, and I am supposing that you 
are referring to the SPIN project. As you probably know from the Peirce-L 
discussions, I am directing that effort with Terry Moore.


In a footnote, you say the following:  "I could post the links here, but the 
editors in charge of these transcription efforts are naturally desirous to 
maintain quality and keep participation manageable. However, if you are 
seriously into Peirce, it is quite informative to contribute to the process. If 
you think you’d like to contribute, do some searching on transcribe and Peirce 
to find these projects on your own, or contact me directly for sources."


In fact, the SPIN project is now up and running in what might be called "phase 
one of implementation," and we'd like to encourage any and all who might be 
interested to join the transcription efforts.  As such, we'd appreciate it if 
you (and others) would share links to the SPIN project through your webpage and 
any other contacts you might have. Having tried to recruit volunteers via the 
Peirce-L , conference presentations, and other online resources, the project 
has grown from a handful of participants to more than 45. Some volunteers have 
taken on the task of transcribing entire lectures or drafts of essays, and we 
are especially appreciative of their heroic efforts. Having said that, we'd 
love to have hundreds of volunteers joining in the efforts--even if some only 
transcribe a page or two. As they say, many hands make for light work.


In order to get started, volunteers can read the transcription guidelines and 
then watch the short video that explains how to make transcriptions. The 
process is pretty simply for transcribing text, and there are more detailed 
instructions for those willing to take on the challenge of encoding logical 
formulas and diagrams. See the links in opening remarks for the SPIN collection 
on FromThePage:


https://fromthepage.com/jeffdown1/c-s-peirce-manuscripts

C. S. Peirce Manuscripts | 
FromThePage<https://fromthepage.com/jeffdown1/c-s-peirce-manuscripts>
fromthepage.com
C. S. Peirce Manuscripts - collection overview. The goal of the Scalable Peirce 
Interpretation Network (SPIN) is to develop a model environment for distributed 
collaboration that can support an international network of researchers, 
students, and citizen scholars in cooperative efforts to encode and interpret 
handwritten manuscripts, including those of high complexity. As our testbed, we 
plan to use the "Logic Notebook" that Charles Sanders Peirce, the founder of 
Pragmatism, kept as the seedbed and greenhouse for his ideas together with 
related sets of manuscripts in logic and semiotics. We are treating the pages 
in the MS 145 folder as a sandbox. Take the platform for a test run and play 
with the toolset. The enhanced set of LaTeX tools for encoding the algebraic 
formulas and graphical diagrams have been added, and a set of guidelines for 
making the encodings is ready to go. Here are links to Transcription Guidelines 
on the SPIN Project website, digital images of the Ma


In the future, when we have sufficient support and funding, we plan to create 
an instance on Zooniverse. The directors of that large and ongoing project have 
agreed to let us use a project instance to recruit volunteers to the SPIN site. 
Given the fact that Zooniverse has over a million volunteers engaged in citizen 
science and scholarship, we see this as a significant opportunity to grow our 
volunteer base.


We have partnered with a number of groups, including the PEP and the 
Transkribus/READ projects. As such, we are exploring innovative ways to support 
the transcription efforts of a large community of volunteers and are also 
looking at downstream uses of the transcriptions for the sake of assisting the 
editors of the PEP with their aims of creating a 30 volume set of Chronological 
Writings--and also support other editors and scholars who might have interests 
in specific texts or writings on specific topics. If you have any questions, 
let me know.


Yours,


Jeff



Jeffrey Downard
Associate Professor
Department of Philosophy
Northern Arizona University
(o) 928 523-8354


________________________________
From: Mike Bergman <m...@mkbergman.com>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2018 10:24 AM
To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Aristotle and Peirce


Hi Jon,

Excellent quote; thanks, Jon. I had not seen (recalled?) it before, and it 
offers another example of Peirce's universal categories, plus is the clearest 
statement I have seen yet of Peirce's definition of nominalism v realism.

Mike

On 2/12/2018 11:00 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
List:

As the chief culprit for the recent glut of messages--apparently I was the 
sender of more than one-third of the 200+ over the first 11 days of February--I 
offer my sincere apology, and my promise to try to temper my enthusiasm for the 
current discussion topics, or at least "pace myself" (as the saying goes) in 
responding.  Please do not hesitate to contact me directly off-List if you 
think that I am getting out of hand again.

I am replying in this thread only because I believe that the following excerpt 
provides a direct answer to Stephen R.'s question about whether Peirce 
classified Aristotle as a nominalist.

CSP:  Aristotle held that Matter and Form were the only elements of experience. 
But he had an obscure conception of what he calls entelechy, which I take to be 
a groping for the recognition of a third element which I find clearly in 
experience. Indeed it is by far the most overt of the three. It was this that 
caused Aristotle to overlook it ... Aristotle, so far as he is a nominalist, 
and he may, I think, be described as a nominalist with vague intimations of 
realism, endeavors to express the universe in terms of Matter and Form alone 
... It may be remarked that if, as I hold, there are three categories, Form, 
Matter, and Entelechy, then there will naturally be seven schools of 
philosophy; that which recognizes Form alone, that which recognizes Form and 
Matter alone, that which recognizes Matter alone (these being the three kinds 
of nominalism); that which recognizes Matter and Entelechy alone; that which 
recognizes Entelechy alone (which seems to me what a perfectly consistent 
Hegelianism would be); that which recognizes Entelechy and Form alone (these 
last three being the kinds of imperfect realism); and finally the true 
philosophy which recognizes Form, Matter, and Entelechy. (NEM 4:294-295; c. 
1903?, emphasis added)

This is part of a lengthy passage where, as I have remarked in other recent 
threads, Peirce explicitly associated Form with 1ns (quality or suchness), 
Matter with 2ns (the subject of a fact), and Entelechy with 3ns (that which 
brings together Matter and Form; i.e., Signs).

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt<http://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> - 
twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt<http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt>

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:22 AM, Stephen C. Rose 
<stever...@gmail.com<mailto:stever...@gmail.com>> wrote:
173. But fallibilism cannot be appreciated in anything like its true 
significancy until evolution has been considered. This is what the world has 
been most thinking of for the last forty years -- though old enough is the 
general idea itself. Aristotle's philosophy, that dominated the world for so 
many ages and still in great measure tyrannizes over the thoughts of butchers 
and bakers that never heard of him -- is but a metaphysical evolutionism.
Peirce: CP 1.174 Cross-Ref:††

Interesting. Has anyone done a study of Peirce and Aristotle. In what did 
Peirce's alleged tyranny consist?  This is in something I found in an old book 
I have but it is also in CP. Did classify Aristotle as a dualist or nominalist? 
Or more narrowly as here?

amazon.com/author/stephenrose<http://amazon.com/author/stephenrose>

-----------------------------
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