BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}JAS
I keep referring to the notion of 'self-organization' - and my
understanding of God or Nature [and I note that Peirce uses the terms
interchangeably - see 8.210, 211] is that the Universe self-organizes
these necessary modal categories.
God/Nature is not 'immanent' in or caused by any of the three
categories --[matter 2ns, Mind 3ns, Ideas 1ns] but is a principle of
self-organization within the Universe of semiosis that requires all
three categories.
That is, I see the semiosic function as self-organizing - I recall
Peirce's outline of the emergence of our universe [1.412] and the
description is most clearly an action of self-organization.
Edwina
On Sat 18/05/19 6:29 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt [email protected]
sent:
Edwina, List:
ET: There is nothing in Peirce where he writes about any reality
outside of the Universe ...
Except, of course, where he writes that God is "in my belief Really
creator of all three Universes of Experience" (CP 6.452, EP 2:434;
1908) and "a Being not immanent in the Universes of Matter, Mind,
and Ideas, but the Sole Creator of every content of them without
exception" (R 843:15; 1908).
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USAProfessional Engineer, Amateur
Philosopher, Lutheran Laymanwww.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt [1] -
twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt [2]
On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 5:19 PM Edwina Taborsky wrote:
JAS, list
1] With regard to" It is that if any signs are connected, no
matter how, the resulting system constitutes one sign; " - my
interpretation is that the Signs - multiple Signs - [the triad of
O-R-I] can be connected within the similarity of their common
mediating Representamen laws or iconically or indexically - as for
example, all individuals are the members of one species; or a
photocopy of a document or a network of vines growing together. And
this results in a SYSTEM of connected individuals which share a key
attribute. But this does not reduce them to ONE individual Sign; it
merely explains their commonality as one semiosic Sign.
2] You state that "an Argument is the most complex kind of Sign
that there is! Nevertheless, like any other Sign, it must be
determined by an Object other than itself."
I disagree; an Argument is not the term for only the Representamen
but for a full triadic semiosic function; an
'Argument-Symbolic-Legisign. The relation to the Object is Symbolic
and is a part/correlate of the semiosic triad, the full Sign.
3] You wrote: "The word "therefore" implies that this is the
conclusion of an argumentation. What are the premisses from which it
necessarily follows that the Universe is self-organizing, and that
there is nothing outside of it?"
The Universe as an Argument contains within it the full semiosic
triad of O-R-I. As such, it is complete in itself, and within itself,
it is 'perfused with sign' - by which I understand that the Universe
is constantly generating signs [understood as 'individualities' in
the format of O-R-I] which interact with other signs [understood as
individualities in the format of O-R-I]. I consider that the habits
of 3ns are self-organizing within these Signs - Peirce has explained
the generation and evolution of habits quite well.
There is nothing in Peirce where he writes about any reality outside
of the Universe, and - with regard to my readings in physics etc, I
can find no evidence of such
Edwina
Links:
------
[1] http://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt
[2] http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
[3]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'[email protected]\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
-----------------------------
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 .
