Supplement: Maybe too, I suffer from disharmonyphopia, or am harmony-addicted, so always look for compatibility instead of contradiction. And I like Noam Chomsky.
John, list,
In the list I often sense, not only in your posts, a strong antipathy against certain philosophers and their theories. On one hand I understand that, because I have felt something like that too, against Skinner and his behaviourism. Not to speak of Nietzsche, his resentful refution-attempt of values, and his superman. On the other hand I suspect, that some of these dualities (e.g.: Nominalism/universalism, semantics/semiotics, linguistic turn/cognitive turn, empiricism/metaphysics) are not necessarily antinomies, but may be regarded for theses/antitheses, that may merge to syntheses, dialectically. Isnt that so? It is only a hunch of mine, as I have not studied these theories thoroughly. But all these opponental philosophers did not always mutually refuse to attend each other´s meetings. They also talked with each other and learned from each other, or so it says on Wikipedia. I guess, or suspect, that some opposing -isms are not either-or-matters, but merely different approaches, namely top-down-method versus bottom-up-method. Just guessing, more or less.
Best, Helmut
01. Juni 2018 um 16:56 Uhr
"John F Sowa" <s...@bestweb.net>
wrote:
"John F Sowa" <s...@bestweb.net>
wrote:
Mary,
> My previous post was intended for John alone. Please ignore it.
> I apologize for my mistake.
Please don't apologize. I'm glad to get the free advertising.
> reading Joyce’s ouevre, reading Peirce (whom I think Joyce read in 1903-4
> when he reviewed FCS Schiller’s book on pragmatism in a Dublin paper),
> and this, because it shows me the best so-far explanation of what world-
> representation-language-logic games Joyce was experimenting with.
That led me to your article, which elaborates that point:
https://www.academia.edu/30720270/James_Joyces_comments_on_pragmatism_in_Review_of_Humanism_by_Ferdinand_Channing_Scott_Schiller
The connection between logic, language, philosophy, and literature,
which Joyce recognized, was undermined by the misguided program of
Frege, Russell, Carnap, and Quine. I believe that philosophy, logic,
and the world today would have been much better if logicians and
philosophers had followed Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein.
As just one example, Carnap's most serious denunciation was
"That's poetry!" But Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein had
appreciated the insights of poetry and literature. Wittgenstein
visited the Vienna Circlers several times, but he refused to
attend any meeting at which Carnap would be present.
For the fact that the development of logic did not depend on anything
that Frege wrote, see "Peirce the Logician" by Hilary Putnam:
http://jfsowa.com/peirce/putnam.htm
For the other issues, see "Signs, processes, and language games",
http://jfsowa.com/pubs/signproc.pdf
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 .
> My previous post was intended for John alone. Please ignore it.
> I apologize for my mistake.
Please don't apologize. I'm glad to get the free advertising.
> reading Joyce’s ouevre, reading Peirce (whom I think Joyce read in 1903-4
> when he reviewed FCS Schiller’s book on pragmatism in a Dublin paper),
> and this, because it shows me the best so-far explanation of what world-
> representation-language-logic games Joyce was experimenting with.
That led me to your article, which elaborates that point:
https://www.academia.edu/30720270/James_Joyces_comments_on_pragmatism_in_Review_of_Humanism_by_Ferdinand_Channing_Scott_Schiller
The connection between logic, language, philosophy, and literature,
which Joyce recognized, was undermined by the misguided program of
Frege, Russell, Carnap, and Quine. I believe that philosophy, logic,
and the world today would have been much better if logicians and
philosophers had followed Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein.
As just one example, Carnap's most serious denunciation was
"That's poetry!" But Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein had
appreciated the insights of poetry and literature. Wittgenstein
visited the Vienna Circlers several times, but he refused to
attend any meeting at which Carnap would be present.
For the fact that the development of logic did not depend on anything
that Frege wrote, see "Peirce the Logician" by Hilary Putnam:
http://jfsowa.com/peirce/putnam.htm
For the other issues, see "Signs, processes, and language games",
http://jfsowa.com/pubs/signproc.pdf
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 .
----------------------------- 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 .
