Edwina, List: ET: To 'be' such a law, they must 'be' within matter, as the law that organizes that matter.
Again, this is misleading. In order to *exist*, a Law must indeed be instantiated in at least one individual case; but its *Being *does not amount to or depend on any such instantiation, or even the discrete collection of *all *such instantiations. 3ns cannot be reduced to the "organization" of 2ns. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 3:14 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Gary R, list > > No- I don't conflate or merge 3ns and 2ns. I've no idea how, after all > these years of my posts, you would come to such a conclusion about my views > of the three universes/categories. And I certainly don't reduce the three > categories/universes to two. > > Just because I used the word 'embedded' doesn't mean merger or > conflation. My understanding of habits/3ns is that they, as laws, organize > matter. BUT, since they are generals, then, they are not, in themselves, > actuals; they are not existents in the mode of 2ns. To 'be' such a law, > they must 'be' within matter, as the law that organizes that matter. So, > the law of organizing a bacterium isn't 'existential' [2ns] outside of that > bacterium but is an integral part, as organization [3ns] of that bacterium. > > So- nothing I've said denies the quotes you've provided. > > Edwina >
----------------------------- 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 .
