John S., List: JFS: He also agreed about the approximate synonyms of seme/pheme/delome with rheme/dicisign/argument and term/proposition/argument.
I have never denied that they are *approximate *synonyms. Seme/Pheme/Delome is a generalization of Rheme/Dicisign/Argument, which is a generalization of term/proposition/argument. I acknowledged all along that Argument is equivalent to Delome, and you have persuaded me to employ Proposition rather than Dicisign or Pheme, especially once I confirmed that Peirce himself did so for utterances other than assertions. However, a Rheme is different from a term in that it is not necessarily a Symbol and includes a continuous predicate (unattached Lines of Identity), making it an incomplete Proposition; while a Seme is different from a Rheme in *not* including a continuous predicate. I prefer to analyze the continuous predicate as part of a Proposition, rather than any of its constituent Signs, which rules out calling the latter "Rhemes"; and I am interested in Icons and Indices, not just Symbols, which rules out calling them "terms." I have already explained why I also find "predicate" inappropriate as an alternative, at least for my current purposes. I suppose that I could invent my own word, but that would violate Peirce's ethics of terminology in the other direction, since he already created a suitable one--which happens to have the advantage of being the root of "semiosis" and "sem(e)iotic." I honestly cannot see why using "Seme," after carefully spelling out exactly what it means, is somehow going to be problematic. JFS: So I googled Francesco Bellucci, _Peirce's Speculative Grammar: Logic as Semiotic_, which was published in 2018. The excerpts in the Google book version are indeed impressive, and I would recommend the book to anyone who is interested in the issues discussed in the recent emails. I read the book last summer, have referred back to it on various occasions since then, and agree that it is excellent. We have even discussed a few aspects of it on the List, and Dr. Bellucci himself joined us for a while in early September; his first post is archived at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2018-09/msg00004.html. You were involved in that conversation, responding directly to Dr. Bellucci on at least a couple of occasions. I am eagerly awaiting his two forthcoming sequels on Peirce's Logical Critic and Speculative Rhetoric (or Methodeutic). I credit that book with calling to my attention Peirce's notion of the continuous predicate, which now figures so prominently in my analysis of Propositions. However, Dr. Bellucci's project is largely what I call "exegetical," presenting and explicating what he takes to be Peirce's own views; while mine is more "systematic," reworking some of the concepts and terminology with the goal of tying it all together in a perspicuous and fruitful way. Both tasks are necessary and important. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 7:31 AM John F Sowa <[email protected]> wrote: > I received an offline note from an author who has written books > and papers about issues related to the recent discussions. > > On the neglect of Peirce's writings by modern philosophers, > the author wrote: > > You're certainly right. The reason is probably Peirce's forbidding > > terminology and the serious amount of reading you have to invest > > in order to grasp what he was really achieving. > > He also agreed about the approximate synonyms of seme/pheme/delome > with rheme/dicisign/argument and term/proposition/argument. > > And he asked > > did you see Bellucci's impressive Speculative Grammar book? > > I admit that I hadn't. So I googled Francesco Bellucci, > _Peirce's Speculative Grammar: Logic as Semiotic_, which > was published in 2018. > > The excerpts in the Google book version are indeed impressive, > and I would recommend the book to anyone who is interested in > the issues discussed in the recent emails. > > I also used Google's search option for the word 'seme'. It found > the passages from CP 4.538 ff, which Bellucci had quoted, and it > found some cross-references to those passages. But there were > no statements by Bellucci that contained the word 'seme'. > > 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 .
