Jon Alen, You are a nasty kind of guy, trying to expose yourself by reading all kind of opinion to be corrected in others messages.
Disgusting rethorical tactics. As disgusting as the neighbour cat that allways is pissing against the same doorpost. Auke > Op 27 juni 2020 om 2:12 schreef Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com>: > > Auke, Edwina, List: > > Just to clarify, according to Peirce neither the absolutely indeterminate > "initial stage" (1ns) nor the absolutely determinate "final stage" (2ns) is > actual. Instead, these are ideal limits that correspond to the infinite past > and the infinite future, respectively. In the meantime, all three categories > are always operative. > > > > > CSP: We look back toward a point in the infinitely > distant past when there was no law but mere indeterminacy; we look forward to > a point in the infinitely distant future when there will be no indeterminacy > or chance but a complete reign of law. But at any assignable date in the > past, however early, there was already some tendency toward uniformity; and > at any assignable date in the future there will be some slight aberrancy from > law. (CP 1.409, EP 1:277, 1887-8) > > > > > > > > > > CSP: The state of things in the infinite past is chaos, > tohu bohu, the nothingness of which consists in the total absence of > regularity. The state of things in the infinite future is death, the > nothingness of which consists in the complete triumph of law and absence of > all spontaneity. Between these, we have on our side a state of things in > which there is some absolute spontaneity counter to all law, and some degree > of conformity to law, which is constantly on the increase owing to the growth > of habit. (CP 8.317, 1891) > > > > > > In other words, the ongoing evolution (3ns) of our existing universe is > such that it is always becoming more determinate in accordance with Gary > Richmond's vector > https://arisbe.sitehost.iu.edu/menu/library/aboutcsp/richmond/trikonic.htm of > process (1ns→3ns→2ns). > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran > Laymanhttp://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > -http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:19 PM Edwina Taborsky < tabor...@primus.ca > mailto:tabor...@primus.ca > wrote: > > > > > > Yes - I like that outline by Peirce as well. The first stage if we > > can call it that, after 'nothing', is chaos [Firstness] and then, the > > second stage is Thirdness where Mind begins to take charge and develop > > habits of organization - which permit the discrete 'bits' of Secondness to > > actually exist for more than a nanosecond, and, to reproduce as types > > [whether as chemical molecules or as cells]. > > > > Firstness continues within Thirdness; and therefore, there cannot > > be a final state of pure habits. > > > > Edwina > > > > On Fri 26/06/20 2:59 PM , Auke van Breemen peirce-l@list.iupui.edu > > mailto:peirce-l@list.iupui.edu sent: > > > > > > > > > > Edwina, > > > > > > With regard to the estimate of final stage I always am of the > > > opinion that we can only reasonably discuss it afterwards as to its true > > > nature. > > > > > > I have no religious inclinations, but can have sympathy with > > > certain religious expressions. I do like Spinoza's naturalization of > > > god. What I did value in Peirce's estimate is this fragment: > > > > > > We exist in time, which is the second stage of cosmological > > > evolution, that of thirdness, characterized by both regularity (laws) and > > > diversity (spontaneity and "chance"). As the universe evolves, laws and > > > habits develop and become more and more regular. What was originally > > > spontaneity becomes law. But new spontaneities continue to arise, > > > increasing the variety of the world (Peirce, 1931-1935, 6.101). > > > > > > It is an improvement on Spinoza, a process approach. > > > > > > best, > > > > > > Auke > > > > > > Op 26 juni 2020 om 17:05 schreef Edwina Taborsky : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Auke, list > > > > > > > > Thanks for the link and the interesting comments about > > > > the artistic process. > > > > > > > > My comment is only about the cosmological outline, and > > > > of course reflects my own view. As an atheist, I have a problem with > > > > the anthropomorphic transformation of 'Mind' [which is a term Peirce > > > > also uses to refer to 'god' ] to the term of 'God', which is a term > > > > overloaded with anthropomorphic meanings, including agency, > > > > predetermined goals, interventionism, etc. > > > > > > > > But my other quibble is her suggestion that the final > > > > stage is one of Secondness. My view of Secondness is that it functions > > > > within individual particles, ie, 'bits of matter' - and as such finite > > > > entities, will always be undergoing dissipation [unless time also > > > > stops] . My understanding of the final stage is instead, 'the complete > > > > induration of habit reducing the free play of feeling and the brute > > > > irrationality of effort to complete death'. 6.201. This refers to > > > > Thirdness. However, as noted in 6.148, "habits would become wooden and > > > > ineradicable, and no room being left for the formation of new habits, > > > > intellectual life would come to a speedy close...." But - Peirce > > > > reminds us that 'There always remains a certain amount of spontaneity > > > > in its action, without which it would be dead" 6.148. > > > > > > > > Edwina > > > > > > > > On Fri 26/06/20 7:30 AM , Auke van Breemen > > > > peirce-l@list.iupui.edu mailto:peirce-l@list.iupui.edu sent: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John, > > > > > > > > > > A good summary of Peirce's take on esthetics is > > > > > to be found at: http://www.signosemio.com/peirce/esthetics.asp > > > > > > > > > > A nice feat of the description is that it > > > > > contains some fine remarks on Peirce's conception of God. > > > > > > > > > > In the end, I think, that Peirce could regard any > > > > > work on art less feeble only if three aspects are explicated in the > > > > > study: > > > > > > > > > > 1. The quality of the artwork in itself > > > > > > > > > > 2. the way in which (or adequacy) it expresses > > > > > qualities of feelings > > > > > > > > > > 3. the way in which it adresses (effectiveness) > > > > > its interpretant thought. > > > > > > > > > > and discussed in their interrelation with each > > > > > other in any case study. > > > > > > > > > > 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 peirce-L@list.iupui.edu > . > ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to > l...@list.iupui.edu 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. >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu 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.
