John, List:

JFS:  I keep copies of most of the messages I send, but delete most of the
ones I receive.  So I can't list all the occurrences.


As I have pointed out before, the List archives (
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l) are always available online to
anyone.

JFS:  But following are two (of many) that illustrate the point:


The specific allegation was that I "claim that [my] theory is a
harmonization of what Peirce intended."  Neither of your examples includes
any such claim.  The first one says that *my *purpose is to attempt to
harmonize different passages from Peirce's writings in accordance with
*my *systematizing
and regularizing tendencies.  The second one talks about harmonizing
*my *recent
line of thinking with *my *earlier one.  In both cases (and in general), I
clearly acknowledge that the synthesis is *mine*, and I have never stated
or implied that it is anything that *Peirce *intended.

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:05 PM John F Sowa <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jon and Edwina,
>
> JAS
> > JFS: My *only* complaint is about the word 'harmonize' and the claim
> > that your theory is a harmonization of what Peirce intended ... If
> > you called your theory Peircean, I would have no quarrel.  But if
> > you call it Peirce's or claim that it is what Peirce intended, I
> > can't let it stand.
> >
> > JAS:  I keep asking, and you keep failing to answer--when and where
> > have I ever made such a claim?
>
> I keep copies of most of the messages I send, but delete most of the
> ones I receive.  So I can't list all the occurrences.  But following
> are two (of many) that illustrate the point:
>
> JAS
> > 5/11/2019, 10:14 PM
> > My purpose (as usual) is to interpret Peirce by attempting
> > to harmonize each passage that I encounter with his corpus
> > taken as a whole, in accordance with my systematizing and
> > regularizing tendencies.
> >
> > 8/2/2018, 4:44 PM
> > Eventually I will be going back to see whether and how I
> > can harmonize this recent line of thinking with my earlier
> > one that focused on Form/Matter/Entelechy.
>
> The phrase "(as usual)" confirms my impression that these lengthy
> threads are not about the matter at hand, but about a preconceived
> vision of Peirce's corpus.
>
> The second  quotation indicates that JAS has several "lines of
> thinking", which he can "go back to" and "harmonize" with new
> lines that may come up in a discussion.
>
> By itself, having a personal vision of some topic is not bad.
> But in any lengthy thread with JAS, I get the impression that
> the implicit topic is some preconceived harmony lurking in the
> back of his head.
>
> JAS
> > Why the double standard? [about Edwina's "analytic framework"]
>
> ET
> > There is absolutely nothing in my outline that can't be found in Peirce.
>
> I sympathize with ET on this point.  But I'd like to see any such
> outline, diagram, text, or harmonization posted online.  It should
> be possible to cite the URL rather than some email note from months
> or even years ago.
>
> ET
> > What is needed, in my view, is to move one's use of Peirce beyond
> > academic discussions of his specific terminology and text - and see
> > how his actual analysis applies to the real world and how it can
> > explain the functional operations of this real world.
>
> I very strongly agree.  My major frustration with Peirce's writings
> is the limited number of examples.  The few examples he stated --
> the word 'the' as an example of a token -- have been quoted and
> requoted far too much.  We desperately need many, many more examples.
>
> And those examples should be posted online.  Is it possible to get
> a web page that is dedicated Peirce-L contributions that are more
> substantial than a typical email note?  They don't have to be
> polished for publication, and the authors should have the option
> of updating them as their ideas develop.
>
> 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 .




Reply via email to