Gary F., List: I honestly thought that I spelled it out rather clearly, but I guess that I will try again.
The earlier passages seem to be saying that the logical depth/signification of a Sign corresponds to qualities or characters of its Dynamic Object (2ns/Matter), which together constitute its ground or Immediate Object (1ns/Form). The information (breadth x depth) of a Sign then corresponds to the unity of the Object with its characters; i.e., the Sign's Interpretant (3ns/Entelechy). All of this makes a lot of sense to me right now, but the later passages seem to be saying instead that the logical depth/signification of a Sign corresponds to its Interpretant. This is what I am having trouble reconciling. For example, If that is the case, then where does the Sign's information fit into the picture? Admittedly, it gives me pause that Peirce introduced the whole notion of Immediate Object at almost exactly the same time that he shifted to the later concept of depth/signification (1904-1906). Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 8:11 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Jon, > > > > Regarding your other (longer) post, the one thing you haven’t explained is > why you see a discrepancy between Peirce’s use of “signification” in > reference to predicates and his use of the same term in reference to > interpretants. I imagine that the discrepancy is so obvious to you that it > would be difficult for you to explain it to people like me who just don’t > see it, and therefore see no need to “reconcile” Peircean statements that > you see as contradictory. Nevertheless I hope you’ll try to explain it, so > the rest of us can see where you’re coming from on this issue (or > non-issue, as the case may be!) > > > > Gary f. >
----------------------------- 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 .
