BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
List
I understand the logical interpretant [LI] as functioning within the
mode of Thirdness, which enables its generalized content to engage in
'habit-changes' [see1907, Pragmatism, 5.475] ..and thus, function in a
'relatively future tense of 'would be' 5.480-6],
Now, not all semiosic processes function to produce habit-changes;
indeed, the majority of our daily life should not produce such
ongoing variations; the universe requires stability - and not merely
random stability but the certainty of stability. Therefore, the LI
cannot be an inherent capacity of all semiosic actions.
With regard to the Final Interpretant, outlined in 1906 4.536, this
can be understood as referencing itself to the original stimuli from
the Object ; i.e., validating that the stimuli, as interpreted by the
mediation of the Sign, was accurate. [ This is Peirce's Objective
Idealism] - Nevertheless this Interpretant is connected to the
actions of the Logical Interpretant, because both refer to habits -
in this case 'that Habit in the production of which the function of
the Sign, as such, is exhausted' [1910. ILS 285 Letters to Paul
Carus]. This puts the Final Interpretant also in the mode of
Thirdness - and therefore, quite similar to the Final Logical
Interpretant. 1907; EP2.418..
Therefore - I do not understand how JAS can insert the FI in a
primary position to the II and DI - I understand this is not a
temporal insertion, but, even as a logical insertion - since so many
semiosic actions do not and should not include, ever, any capacity
for a FI or a LI
Final Causation in Peirce, is not an ultimate ideal; it is general
habits - similar to the Final Interpretant and FInal Logical
Interpretant. But it is not a Platonic ideal.
By the way, a 'feeling of X ' [heat, redness, assurance] is a valid
triadic sign, the Qualisign. I know that JAS does not include the
Qualisign as a valid sign. The quotation of 4.536, where Peirce
writes that "a Sign has an object and an Interpretant, the latter
being that which the Sign produces in the quasi-mind that is the
interpreter by determining the latter to a feeling, to an exertion,
or to a Sign, which determination is the Interpretant". I do not read
this to mean that when a feeling is produced, that this is NOT a sign;
or when an exertion is produced that this is NOT a sign - and that
only when a symbol is produced, that this is a sign.
That would deny Peirce's entire classification of signs - which
includes iconic and indexical and non-symbolic signs. That is, most
of Peircean semiosis takes place in the actualities of Secondness; as
Peirce himself says, 'final causality cannot be imagined without
efficient causality' 1.213. What Peirce inserts within these
actualities is the process of Mind, working with Matter. [Matter is
effete Mind].
With regard to Robert's suggestion of the representamen referring to
the 'universe of possibilities' I have already said that I think it is
an excellent suggestion because it acknowledges the realm of
possibilities [which I refer to as non-local semiosis] vs the nature
of actualities [local]. It acknowledges that thought/semiosic
processes can operate within pure speculation, which enables
anticipation of events, ie, enables the organism to 'imagine' the
situation without taking any risks of being actually involved.
Actualization involves making a choice from these 'infinite
possibilities' - and Mind has already browsed through these
possibilities via the Representamen phase - and then, moves into the
Sign phase of actualization. I think that's an acknowledgment of the
complex adaptive nature of semiosis.
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 no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of
the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
