Helmut, List: You are welcome! This is a simple and clear example of the contrast between the two most extreme alternatives for analyzing a Proposition. Peirce's eventual preference was to throw everything into the *subject*, leaving only the Continuous Predicate; while his earlier approach (adopted by modern logic) was to throw everything into the *predicate*, leaving only a quantified variable as the subject--"anything you please," "something I could designate," or "this specific thing."
Regards, Jon S. On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:30 PM Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you, Jon! > > *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 30. Januar 2019 um 18:33 Uhr > *Von:* "Jon Alan Schmidt" <[email protected]> > *An:* "Helmut Raulien" <[email protected]> > *Betreff:* Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Speculative Grammar: Logic as > Semiotic > Helmut, List: > > "Resistance," "is," and "futile" are all Semes (or Names) in the obvious > sense that each serves as a substitute for its Object. "_____ is > resistance" and "_____ is futile" are both Rhemes, which are Semes (or > Names) with blank Continuous Predicates or unattached Lines of Identity; > i.e., incomplete Propositions. Peirce's ultimate logical analysis of the > Proposition would classify both "resistance" and "futility" as Descriptive > Semes (or Names), and "_____ possesses the character of _____" as the > Continuous Predicate. Modern logic would instead classify both > "resistance" and "futile" as predicates and restate the Proposition as "For > any x, if x is resistance then x is futile." Peirce's typical way of > expressing the latter would classify the subject as "anything you please" > and the predicate as "is either futile or not resistance." > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 10:55 AM Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote: > >> John, list, >> Is a seme that what might be replaced by a name? Because a rheme, as I >> remember, is the part of a proposition, that is not the part that might be >> replaced with a name. So, does a proposition consist of a seme and a rheme? >> Example: In "resistance is futile": Is "resistance" the seme, and "is >> futile" the rheme, the rheme consisting of the predicate "futile" and the >> peg "is"? >> Ok, "resistance" might be called a name itself. Other example: "Attending >> the Southpark elementary school probably is not a good choice": "Attending >> the Southpark elementary school" is not a name, but might be replaced by >> one: "Helmut probably is not a good choice". So "Attending the Southpark >> elementary school" is the seme, "is not a good choice" is the rheme, "not a >> good choice" is the predicate, and "probably is" is the peg? >> Best wishes from the good choice >> Helmut >> >
----------------------------- 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 .
