Francesco, Thanks for the very helpful comments. I'd just like to make one point about terminology:
Peirce defines a rheme as that which remains of a proposition after something replaceable by a proper name has been removed from it, where "replaceable" means that when the replacement has occurred, we have again a proposition.
I believe that this is Peirce's version of what Church called lambda abstraction. See the attached lambda.gif. This is slide 15 from http://jfsowa.com/talks/egintro.pdf I wrote egintro for the people I typically work with and talk with. A few of them know a great deal about Peirce, but most of them have no idea that his writings are relevant to anything they do. It's important to reach those people because they are the ones who teach the next generation. I have attended a few Peirce sessions at meetings of the APA, but those were the *only* talks in which Peirce was mentioned. It's essential to bring Peirce into the mainstream. That's the theme of my article "Peirce's contributions to the 21st century": http://jfsowa.com/pubs/csp21st.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 [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 .
