John, List:

JFS:  I have learned a lot by studying texts written by many authors.  But
if anyone asked whether I believe the details, I would answer with a
statement that is sufficiently vague to be certain:  Theos = Logos = Tao =
Dharma = Natura = God of Spinoza, Einstein...


Each of those terms, taken by itself, is indeed quite vague.  However,
*equating
*all of them with each other is a bold assertion, and not at all certain;
I, for one, flatly deny it.

JFS:  The rest is poetry.


And what did Peirce have to say about poetry?

CSP:  The generalization of sentiment can take place on different sides.
Poetry is one sort of generalization of sentiment, and in so far is the
regenerative metamorphosis of sentiment. But poetry remains on one side
ungeneralized, and to that is due its emptiness. The complete
generalization, the complete regeneration of sentiment is religion, which
is poetry, but poetry completed. (CP 1.676; 1898)


CSP:  I hear you say: "All that is not *fact*; it is poetry." Nonsense! Bad
poetry is false, I grant; but nothing is truer than true poetry. (CP 1.315,
EP 2:193; 1903)

CSP:  ... the Universe as an argument is necessarily a great work of art, a
great poem,--for every fine argument is a poem and a symphony,--just as
every true poem is a sound argument. (CP 5.119, EP 2:194; 1903)


Regards,

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

On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 7:34 AM John F Sowa <[email protected]> wrote:

> Gary R,
>
> There are two distinct issues, and I admit that I should have
> clearly distinguished them:  (1) What did Peirce write?   And
> (2) What position is "sufficiently vague" to be certain?
>
> JFS
> > Finally, the question of whether matter or mind came first is
> > meaningless.  Time is only defined in a material universe.
> > Without matter, there is no before or after.
> >
> > In summary, all the above theories are consistent with the
> > equation of Theos and Logos.  I believe that Edwina's point
> > is consistent with Peirce, Whitehead, Hartshorne, Potter,
> > and others.
>
> GR
> > I know these four thinkers well, and would draw very different
> > broad generalizations from their work
>
> I have learned a lot by studying texts written by many authors.
> But if anyone asked whether I believe the details, I would answer
> with a statement that is sufficiently vague to be certain:
>
> Theos = Logos = Tao = Dharma = Natura = God of Spinoza, Einstein...
>
> The rest is poetry.  And I would add a quotation by Robert Frost:
> "We rise from disorder into order.  And the poems I write are
> little bits of order."
>
> 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