Jon,
That statement has a very dogmatic tone:
JAS
The whole point of CP 6.24-25 (1891) is that once dualism is dismissed
in favor of monism, there are only three options--mind and matter are
independent (neutralism), matter is primordial such that mind depends on
matter (materialism), or mind is primordial such that matter depends on
mind (idealism). Peirce unambiguously endorsed the last alternative and
rejected the others, and as far as I know, he never abandoned that view.
I won't claim that Peirce never wrote anything similar to that. But
he never stated any philosophical point with such absolute finality.
CSP, CP 4.237
It is easy to speak with precision upon a general theme. Only, one
must commonly surrender all ambition to be certain. It is equally
easy to be certain. One has only to be sufficiently vague. It is not
so difficult to be pretty precise and fairly certain at once about
a very narrow subject.
I checked CP for every occurrence of 'unambiguous'. It only occurs
7 times, and only about mathematics or logic. Those are "very narrow
subjects".
The phrase "whole point" claims that the cited passage has precisely
one point. The phrase "There are only three options" puts all the
variations over the millennia into three distinct lumps.
Those lumps are as general as anything anyone ever imagined.
Therefore, one must surrender all ambition to be certain.
CSP, CP 6.24
The old dualistic notion of mind and matter, so prominent in
Cartesianism, as two radically different kinds of substance, will
hardly find defenders today. Rejecting this, we are driven to some
form of hylopathy, otherwise called monism.
I googled the word 'hylopathy' and found two uses prior to Peirce.
(copy below)
But the first quotation, which is cited by the second, sounds
very similar to the old Cartesian version that Peirce rejected.
Peirce probably remembered the old word, but had forgotten the
details about how it had been used. That is not a point in
favor of using this passage as a basis for a strong conclusion.
Moral of the story: Peirce rejected dogmatism and emphasized
falliblism. We should follow his example.
John
__________________________________________________________________
From https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hylopathy
hylopathy (uncountable)
(obsolete) The ability of a spirit to penetrate and affect matter.
quotations ▲
1662, Henry More, An Antidote Against Atheism, Appendix, Chapter 3:
And this affection of a Spirit we will make bold to call, for more
compendiousness, by one Greek term ὑλοπάθεια which, that there may be no
suspicion of any fraud or affected foolery in words, we will as plainly
as we can define thus, A power in a Spirit of offering so near to a
corporeal emanation from the Center of life, that it will so perfectly
fill the receptivity of Matter into which it has penetrated, that it is
very difficult or impossible for any other Spirit to possess the same,
and therefore of becoming hereby so firmly and closely united to a Body,
as both to actuate and to be acted upon, to affect and be affected thereby.
1726, Joseph Glanvill, Sadducismus trimphatus, page 99:
Which Faculty of Spirits, in the Appendix to the Antidote against
Atheism is called ὑλοπάθεια, the Hylopathy of Spirits, or a Power of
affecting, or being affected by the Matter.
1890, Charles S. Peirce, Architecture of Theories:
The old dualistic notion of mind and matter, so prominent in
Cartesianism, will hardly find defenders today. Rejecting this we are
driven to some form of hylopathy, otherwise called monism.
-----------------------------
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 .
