On 5/3/2018 10:40 AM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
why did Peirce write that pastness is relative? Maybe "pastness" is the feeling, not the past?
When Peirce said "pastness itself obviously is relative", the qualifier 'obviously' is important. J think he meant the simple point that the past is relative to the present. That "obvious" relativity is the same for everybody, and therefore it would be independent of anybody's feelings. But memories of the past would add feelings, which are relative to each individual. That is my interpretation of the word 'obvious'. But I remember an old saying: "Whenever anyone says that something is obvious, that's a sign of some hidden difficulty." 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 [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
