These are very important points that John makes. Although Peirce was extremely careful with his definitions, their entire purpose was to be put to use in science. The only way to effectively discuss their meanings is to take particular empirical problems and show how one interpretation might work better than another to solve or explain a particular phenomenon/range of phenomena. Arguing over definitions without a set of empirical problems to tease apart the alternatives is just a form of essentialism and not something that would have interested Peirce imo.
It is fascinating as a linguist who has seen linguistic theory develop over the years to see how hard Peirce worked to milk every possible empirical prediction out of his terms, leading to their enrichment over time. In the first lecture on Pragmatism in 1903, what irritated William James so much was that Peirce would not simply lay out his theory and define his terms, but he had to demonstrate how the terms worked out in practice, e.g. his examples of insurance calculations whose math far exceeded James’s limited abilities. Agreeing with John, Peircean terminology is neither the Bible nor the Smithsonian. It is a set of suggestions (emerging from a brilliant theory to be sure) on how to get work done. It has been very exciting recently to work with archaeologists in showing how a Peircean understanding of lower Paleolithic tools provides strong evidence that Homo erectus had language. This has been missed by many over the years because Peircean semeiotics tended to be omitted from discussion. The theory is a beautiful tool. Dan > On Apr 23, 2020, at 1:02 PM, John F. Sowa <[email protected]> wrote: > > I just wanted to add a few comments about Peirce's positions on related > issues, but I don't want to get into a quotation war. > > First point, he said that science "walks on a bog," not "bedrock." > > "Indeed, out of a contrite fallibilism, combined with a high faith in the > reality of knowledge, and an intense desire to find things out, all my > philosophy has always seemed to me to grow . . . . [CP 1.14, fragment, c. > 1897] > > "there is one thing even more vital to science than intelligent methods; and > that is, the sincere desire to find out the truth, whatever it may be [CP > 5.84, Lecture 3, Lectures on Pragmatism (1903)] > > "Philosophy ought to imitate the successful sciences in its methods, so far > as to proceed only from tangible premisses which can be subjected to careful > scrutiny, and to trust rather to the multitude and variety of its arguments > than to the conclusiveness of any one. Its reasoning should not form a chain > which is no stronger than its weakest link, but a cable whose fibers may be > ever so slender, provided they are sufficiently numerous and intimately > connected. [CP 5.265, "Some Consequences ..." c. 1868] > > "The method of modern science is social in respect to the solidarity of its > efforts. The scientific world is like a colony of insects, in that the > individual strives to produce that which he himself cannot hope to enjoy. One > generation collects premises in order that a distant generation may discover > what they mean." Peirce (1902) > > Note the emphasis on the social nature of science. Peirce was always writing > for the future. He hoped that future generations would build on and extend > his work, not preserve it as a collection of fossils in a museum. > > 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 . > > > >
----------------------------- 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 .
