Auke- I have a different view of the Final Interpretant - I see it
as a means of 'changing habits'.
My view of the Final Interpretant is that it is a continuous and
infinite process of generalization, vital to the formation of habits.
That is, the Logical or Final or Destinate Interpretant [the name
isn't relevant] is an integral component of the universe's growth and
increasing complexity. ["Everywhere the main fact is growth and
increasing complexity" 6.58....and "I, for my part, think that the
diversification, the specification, has been continually taking
place" 6.57. And "there is probably in nature some agency by which
the complexity and diversity of things can be increased" 6.58.
What is this 'agency'? It's both 'pure spontaneity' or Firstness
[6.59] AND - how does this spontaneity move into the actualities of
Secondness? By means of habit formation. By means of Thirdness. "I
make use of chance chiefly to make room for a principle of
generalization, or tendency to form habits, which I hold has produced
all regularities'. 6.63. See also 6.64 and 6.65...the 'phenomen of
growth and developing complexity which appears to be universal'.
That is, the semiosic process is one that is constantly enabling and
increasing both the diversity and complexity of life. Mind enables
Matter to become more diverse and complex. To enable this - semiosis
does not just focus on the particular individual act of experience of
an external object and the interpretation of that external object.
Such a confinement of the world to Secondness would deny the
realities of Types, of continuity and common adaptation and growth
Semiosis also focuses on enhancing and expanding the depth and
breadth, the complexity, of the development of habits, the knowledge
base/Thirdness that is used within the process of the triadic
semiosis.
It achieves this enhancement/expansion of habits, of generalization
- by means of the Final Interpretant, which is a process of constant
generalization of the informational results of the previous
Interpretants [the II and DI]. And this information comes from many
sites. I think it's important that the 'input' to the FI comes from
many sites.
- "the logical interpretant should in all cases be a conditional
future" . The Interpretants are, after all 'a modification of
consciousness' 5.485. What is the nature of a conditional future?
- 'those signs that have a logical interpretant are either generals
or closely connected with generals" 5.488. See also 5.482 for this
focus on the Logical/Final Interpretant as a general and in the
'conditional mood' of 'would be.
- "the interpretant is a modifier of consciousness" 5.485
-"the whole function of thought is to produce habits of action'
5.400; 6.262
- this 'logical interpretant' has the function of a 'habit-change'
[see 5.476
The works of Peirce are filled with these analyses - too many to
quote here.
That is - my understanding of the Final Interpretant is that its
role is to develop and change habits, relevant to the actual world
[of Secondness] and yet capable of the obvious expansion of diversity
and complexity in life. In the biological realm, what we see is that
the Final Interpretant accepts information/data from many individual
agents; it generalizes this data; and then, this generalization
becomes dominant and acts to change the species habits stored within
Thirdness such that, a bird develops a new beak; a moth develops
different coloured wings..and so on.
The Final Interpretant is not 'often' used; most of life operates
within Firstness/Secondness - and a stable Thirdness. But, the Final
Interpretant is, I feel, the key to how we change habits.
The Final Interpretant is a means of enabling the infinite evolution
of the world's diversity and complexity. It collects data from
multiple sites - generalizes them, and this new 'habit' becomes
dominant and changes the habits-of-formation of a species.
With regard to your example of the changes in style in the life of
an artist - I'd say the process is similar, where the artist develops
a 'normative style of his art'..and then, by means of interaction with
others, with experience etc...comes to a Final Interpretant phase,
where he changes his 'normative style of art'.
Notice that my view of the Final Interpretant is an evolutionary
one; there is no notion of a final Perfection, but instead, a concept
of infinite capacity, via input data from multiple sites, plus the
action of generalization.. to change the habits of a Type.
Edwina
-----------------------------
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 .
