Jon Alan,
JAS: Understood, although I consider the subject matter of my previous
post to be metaphysics rather than religion.
As I pointed out elsewhere our representative interpretants differ
considerably. For me theology is the study dealing with God. It is one of the
special sciences. Religious belief being a matter pertaining to man as an
individual. And the remainer of interest to sociologists and psychologists.
At what place does Peirce relegate religion to methphisics in his writings on
the architectonic of the sciences?
Auke
Op 20 april 2020 om 3:05 schreef Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]>:
Auke, List:
AvB: I will not respond to the content of your words since my aim was not to
start a discussion about religion.
Understood, although I consider the subject matter of my previous post to be
metaphysics rather than religion.
AvB: By the way, I like this one most:
I will simply point out that Peirce is not identifying those "immensely
superior" beings with God, since they would still be finite; he is stating that
the being of God would not rule out the possibility of such beings.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran
Laymanhttp://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt
-http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 4:39 AM < [email protected]
mailto:[email protected] > wrote:
Jon Alan,
Thanks for your response. I will not respond to the content of your words since
my aim was not to start a discussion about religion. In general I skip mails on
the list on that subject. But by our communication on semiotics being in a
cul-de-sac kind of state I started wondering if the cause could reside here.
With our respective views on the final interpretant I think it does.
By the way, I like this one most:
This statement excludes a finite god; although the Being of God would not, as
far as I see, necessarily exclude that of a whole race of beings immensely
superior to ourselves, such, for example, that the whole visible universe might
be no more than a nucleolus in a single cell of the body of one of them.
Best,
Auke
-----------------------------
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 .
-----------------------------
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 .
