Actually, I have no problem with this if it is seen that action values (ethics) are 2. I am more interested in whether and what Peirce saw as the basis for a universal pedagogy which I believe is implicit in his thought.
amazon.com/author/stephenrose On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:22 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected] > wrote: > Charles, List: > > I apologize for being blunt, but we had a rather lengthy and somewhat > contentious List discussion of this topic just last week, so I was hoping > that a brief summary would suffice. Here are links to a few of the key > exchanges for anyone interested in reviewing the details. > > https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2018-08/msg00130.html > https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2018-08/msg00136.html > https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2018-08/msg00147.html > https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2018-08/msg00170.html > > The bottom line is that in Peirce's philosophical system, 1ns/2ns/3ns > correspond to quality/reaction/mediation in phaneroscopy, > feeling/action/thought in Normative Science, and > possibility/actuality/regularity in metaphysics. The consistent > alignment of re*act*ion, *act*ion, and *act*uality with 2ns is neither > accidental nor trivial (cf. CP 4.542; 1906). I do not deny that there are > "symbolic acts" or "triadic action"; I simply advocate properly associating > the *act*ive/*act*ual aspects of these with 2ns, rather than 3ns. > Symbols *as general Signs* do not inter*act* with anything; only their > *individual > Replicas* do. > > Regards, > > Jon S. > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 8:51 PM, Charles Pyle <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Jon, >> >> I don't find your blunt assertion that action is only at the level of 2ns >> to be responsive to my point. >> >> One utters speech in order to perform a speech act in language. Speech is >> a physical phonetic phenomenon that can be taken to be and is action at the >> 2ns level, but speech is performed in order to be taken at the symbolic >> level, that of language, where it performs an event of the symbolic type >> and the nature of the event that occurs is an act. The act of promising, >> asserting, ordering, praising, etc. Such a speech act is an element of an >> inter-action. I don't see how one could begin to make sense of symbolic >> signs if one excludes act, and action and interaction. Obviously a symbolic >> act is different from a physical act, but it is still an act, and one for >> which one might well receive a brute physical reaction. >> >> Do you really intend to deny there is such a thing, albeit merely >> symbolic, as a symbolic act? >> >> Charles Pyle >> >> On August 14, 2018 at 6:28 PM Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Charles, List: >> >> No, the *action *of uttering a Sign is at the level of 2ns. As an *Instance >> *of the Sign, it is an *occurrence* in which a Sign-*Replica *determines >> some Quasi-mind to a *Dynamic *Interpretant--an *actual *feeling, >> exertion, or further Sign-Replica. Any language consists of such >> Tokens--again, at the level of 2ns--which is why words uttered in *different >> *languages can be Replicas of the *same *Sign (Type). Only the latter >> is at the level of 3ns, being *embodied *in particular Existents but >> never *acting *on, *reacting *to, or *interacting *with them. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA >> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman >> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt >> >> On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 4:02 PM, Charles Pyle <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> When one performs a speech act, in the sense used by Austin, such as >> promising, or asserting, is that not action at the level of thirdness? >> Isn't the essence of the doing of something in language an act? >> >> > > ----------------------------- > 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 > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- 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 .
