John F. Sowa, list,
(I've started opening with full names because so many people share first
names lately, and the initials don't explain much to unfamiliar readers.)
John, the CP young editors' stitching together /back and forth across
decades/ of Peirce texts has you looking at two different views held by
Peirce during two different periods of years as if they were
simultaneous. You're seeing them superimposed on each other.
I will show brief tables with Peirce's changing views of the
classifications of philosophy, then the years of composition of the
texts in CP 1 Book 3 ("Phenomenology"), the texts to which you've been
referring collectively.
Many of the paragraphs in CP 1 Book 3 ("Phenomenology") are written as
logical developments of ideas of the categories. That's what Peirce
thought when he wrote those paragraphs, during the 1860s through the
1890s. During those years he thought that philosophy had two main
division, (1) Logic, (2) Metaphysics. Then, by 1902, he began to hold
with the division of philosophy into (1) Phenomenology , (2) Normative
Sciences, and (3) Metaphysics. During that time, he wrote the other
paragraphs in CP 1 Book 3.
Peirce long thought logic to be the 1st part of philosophy, preceding
all else in philosophy. Then he /_came_ /in the 1900s to think that
phaneroscopy precedes philosophical logic; he didn't continue to think
that philosophy began with a logic preceding all else in philosophy
(including phaneroscopy). Additionally, in 1902 he started see pure
math's 1st part as a two-value algebra "mathematics of logic."
Initially, in 1902, the first part consisted of (A) the simplest maths,
the maths of logic & (B) finite groups, https://www.textlog.de/4259.html :
BEGIN QUOTE: The hypotheses of mathematics relate to systems which
are either finite collections, infinite collections, or true
continua; and the modes of reasoning about these three are quite
distinct. These, then, constitute three orders. The last and highest
kind of mathematics, consisting of topical geometry, has hitherto
made very little progress; and the methods of demonstration in this
order are, as yet, little understood. The study of finite
collections divides into two suborders: first, that simplest kind of
mathematics which is chiefly used in its application to logic, from
which I find it almost impossible to separate it^1) ; and secondly,
the general theory of finite groups. END QUOTE.
*1889 Century Dictionary p. 5397*
(A) Mathematics.
[Pure and applied....]
(B) Philosophy.
(1) Logic, consisting of formal grammar, logic proper, and formal
rhetoric
(2) Metaphysics
(C) [etc.]
*1898, EP2.35-37*
1. Mathematics.
2. Philosophy.
2.1. Logic.
2.2. Metaphysics.
3. Special Science.
*1902 etc.*
1. Mathematics.
2. Philosophy.
2.1. Phenomenology (a.k.a. categorics a.k.a. phaneroscopy).
2.2. Normative Sciences.
2.3. Metaphysics.
3. Special Sciences (etc.)
Collected Papers Book 3 "Phnenomenology": Sources.
I don't know whether this is complete.
*1906* 4.534n1, 4.6-11, 4.553n1, 1.306-311, Phaneroscopy.
*1905* 284 from the Adirondack Lectures.
*c.1904* 285-287, 304, from Logic Viewed as Semiotics, Introduction
Number 2, Phaneroscopy.
*c.1908* 288-292, from πλ.
*1905* 294-299, 313, 313n, 350-352, from The Basis of Pragmaticism.
*1894* 300-301, 293, 303, 326-329, The List of Categories. A Second Essay.
*1907?* 305, from An Apology for Pragmaticism, for the January 1907 Monist.
*1906* 306-11, Phaneroscopy MS.
*1910* 312, from Definition.
*c.1905* 313, from The Basis of Pragmatism, Notebook II.
*1903* 314-316 undelivered(?) from Lecture IV of the Lectures on Pragmatism.
*1905* 317-321, from a draft for a Monist article.
*c.1903* 322-323, from Lectures on Pragmatism, II, First Draft.
*1903* 324, from Lowell Lectures of 1903, Lecture III, vol. 1, 3d Draft.
*Undated* 325, unidentified fragment.
*Undated* 330-331, unidentified fragment.
*1906* 332-336, from Phaneroscopy: Or, The natural History of Concepts.
*c.1875* 337, fragment "Third".
*Undated* 338-339, from an unidentified fragment.
*c.1895* 340-342, from a fragment "Thirdness".
*1903* 343-349, The Reality of Thirdness (from the "Lowell Lectures").
*c.1880* 353, from One, Two, Three.
*1888* 354, 1-2, 355-368, 373-375, 379-416, A Guess at the Riddle
*1885* 369-372, 376-378, One, Two, Three: Fundamental Categories of
Thought and of Nature.
*c.1896* 417-520, The Logic of Mathematics: An Attempt to Develop my
Categories from within.
*1867* 545-559, On a New List of Categories.
See:
See Tommi Vehkavaara, "Development of Peirce's classification of
sciences - three stages: 1889, 1898, 1903", 2003,
http://www.uta.fi/~attove/peirce_syst.PDF. "The outline of Peirce's
classification of sciences (1902-1911)" , 2001,
http://www.uta.fi/~attove/peirce_systems3.PDF
Peirce, 1903, An Outline Classification of the Sciences
https://www.textlog.de/4257.html
Peirce, 1902, A Detailed Classification of the Sciences
https://www.textlog.de/4256.html
Peirce, 1902 Memoir 1, On the Classification of the Theoretic Sciences
of Research, from Logic, Regarded as Formal Semeiotic,
http://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/menu/library/bycsp/L75/ver1/l75v1-02.htm#topofpage
There are various links at the "Classification of the Sciences: Peirce"
article, most of which article I wrote, at Wikipedia around 9 years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_of_the_sciences_(Peirce)
Best, Ben
On 9/10/2019 2:24 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
I formatted my previous note ery nicely, but this email handler
scrambled it. I'll just repeat the conclusions. The previous note shows
that they are consistent with what Peirce wrote and with 21st c
terminology..
That produces three version of logic: (1) the
logic of mathematics, which is the first branch of pure mathematiics;
(2) the logic used in CP vol 1 book 3, which is used to analyze the
phaneron to produce the categories; and (3) the logic that depends on all
of the above plus esthetics and ethics:
1. Logic as a branch
of pure mathematics, formal logic (AKA logica docens),
2.
Logic as used to analyze the phaneron to derive the categories, formal
semeiotic.
3. Logic as a normative cience that depends on
esthetics and ethics, informal logic (AKA logic utens) -- or normative
logic.
This terminology is consistent with the practice in
teaching (docens) and using (utens) logic from ancient times to the
present.
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 .
