Dear list, To these passionate pleas to "Do good, avoid bad", I would implore you to consider the critical question:
"*Why then had it not been put to its serious use?"* For *No doubt, Pragmaticism makes thought ultimately apply to action exclusively * *- to conceived action.* With best wishes, Jerry R On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 2:03 PM Gary Richmond <[email protected]> wrote: > List, > > Whoops. I was just informed that I left off the Kyle Henry quote. Sorry > about that. Here it is: > > Kyle Henry: Extremist Libertarianism, ascendant from the Reagan revolution > onward, has been so corrosive in the USA to community and civic life. What > would have happened in the USA if Utilitarianism instead would have won out > ideologically in 1980? Reading my notes on J.S. Mill's "Utilitarianism" > this morning, this stood out: "Not only does all strengthening of social > ties, and all healthy growth of society, give to each individual a stronger > personal interest in practically consulting the welfare of others; it > also leads him to identify his feelings more and more with their good, or > at least with an even greater degree of practical consideration for it... > The good of others becomes to him a thing naturally and necessarily to be > attended to, like any of the physical conditions of our existence. Now, > whatever amount of this feeling a person has, he is urged by the strongest > motives both of interest and of sympathy to demonstrate it, and to the > utmost of his power encourage it in others; and even if he has none of it > himself, he is as greatly interested as any one elase that others should > have it... This mode of conceiving ourselves and human life, as > civilization goes on, is felt to be more and more natural." > > Best, > > Gary R > > "Time is not a renewable resource." gnox > > *Gary Richmond* > *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* > *Communication Studies* > *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 1:56 PM Gary Richmond <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Helmut, List, >> >> After reading your email I happened to get a post from Kyle Henry, a >> well-known film-maker and educator whom I met a few years ago at the SXSW >> premiere of a documentary, 'Before You Know It', which Kyle edited and in >> which I appear. Kyle is also an educator and an armchair philosopher (when >> thoroughly 'self-educated' in philosophy, the best kind, I'm beginning to >> think). >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyle_Henry >> >> In any event, he recently wrote this, which I found thought-provoking in >> the context of several of your recent reflections in the Pragmatic Trivium >> thread. In light of Peirce's discussions of Mill's philosophy (in the >> secondary literature (see, for example: >> https://www.jstor.org/stable/40320085?seq=1), I thought that it might >> help bring the discussion back to pragmatism. Perhaps not. In any event, I >> found it is interesting in its own right and hope that you do as well. >> (Btw, I'll not be discussing politics. including "Libertarianism," in this >> thread unless I see a clear connection to philosophical pragmatism). >> So, this should be seen principally as more American Independence Day >> food for thought. >> >> , >> >> Best, >> >> Gary >> >> >> "Time is not a renewable resource." gnox >> >> *Gary Richmond* >> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* >> *Communication Studies* >> *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 2:25 PM Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Edwina, List, >>> >>> I don´t think that rightism is the same as individualism. I is >>> collective ideology too, though more particularistic than leftism. It >>> claims a supremacy of a particular collective such as "race" or nation. >>> Though leftism sometimes also is particularist, classist. Leftism, if it is >>> supremacistic, wants to give supremacy to groups that dont have it now, >>> while rightism wants the groups that have supremacy now to keep it. >>> Capitalism is neither rightism nor leftism, because it allows the power in >>> the form of money to freely wander between the groups. Only it does not. It >>> tends to stay with those who already have it. >>> >>> >>> 04. Juli 2020 um 19:20 Uhr >>> "Edwina Taborsky" <[email protected]> >>> *wrote:* >>> >>> Terry - please see my comments below: >>> >>> 1] I don't think my understanding of fascism is a 'small minority >>> conception'. I won't take a Wikipedia definition as legitimate and refer >>> you to such works as Robert Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism; Roger Eatwell: >>> Fascism: A History. Of course, there's Mussolini's definition. See also >>> Popper's long definition and analysis in his books: The Open Society and >>> Its Enemies. >>> >>> . All of them focus on the definition of fascism as a collective >>> ideology [which is what makes it 'left' rather than 'right' - for the >>> 'right' ideology promotes the individual while the left promotes the >>> collective'. ]. The point about fascism, with its rejection of individual >>> reason and freedom, is its focus on the organic nation [of which you are >>> just an inherent member] as a determinant of the future. This also puts it >>> firmly in the area of 'historicism' with that notion of a determined future >>> utopia. Its rejection of individual reason and freedom and its focus on a >>> 'higher authority as embedded in the State' puts it within the ideology of >>> the collective.[See Plato's Republic; an outline of fascism - so, it's >>> hardly a modern ideology!!!]. The fact that it is commonly opposed to >>> communism is superficial - for both reject the individual reason and >>> freedom; both are utopian and focused on an a priori 'future goal of >>> perfection'. Both function within, if I may compare: the emotionalism of >>> Firstness and the pure intellectualism of pure Thirdness. Totally alienated >>> from the realities of Secondness - and the 'lesser' Thirdness. >>> >>> 2] I agree - fascism [and communism] reject and deny the famed Social >>> Contract. Since they reject the individual, then, of course, they are not >>> interested in any contractual participation of these individuals in their >>> own governance. >>> >>> 3] I don't see that capitalism is toxic. In fact, I see that capitalism, >>> which means that economic production is in the control of private and free >>> individuals - rather than the State or an aristocracy - has moved more >>> people out of poverty than any economic system in the world. And note - >>> that capitalism doesn't emerge from fascism! >>> >>> 4] I also don't understand your term of 'fascist capitalism'. You >>> haven't explained it. >>> >>> 5 I have no idea what you mean by 'alt-right fascist pseudo-Christianity >>> and fascist capitalism.'. Capitalism, in my definition, can't be fascist >>> [or communist] since its operation is focused around the individual, while >>> that of fascism and communism rejects individual freedoms and economic >>> decision-making. I refer you to Fernand Braudel's magnificent histories of >>> the development of the market economy in the 15th-17th centuries in Europe. >>> See also Milton Friedman's work [eg, Free to Choose]. And F. Hayek's famed >>> 'The Road to Serfdom] >>> >>> A data source for exploring which nations operate within individual >>> freedoms, is to examine the number of inventions, patents, new enterprises >>> in each nation. The USA is the strongest in these fields. >>> >>> 6] Democracy is a messy system - as many have attested, for aligning the >>> freedom of the individual [Firstness and Secondness] with the restraints of >>> the collective habits-Rules [Government] is always contentious - but- to >>> have only ONE of these three universes/categories in operation is >>> disastrous. All three have to interact. Furthermore, to reject historicism, >>> or an a priori destiny and leave the future open - is emotionally difficult >>> for it involves risk - and most of us prefer security, even under a 'gentle >>> tyrant' rather than risk. So democracy has to be always an active process, >>> one which we cherish and support - and where we reject any hints or efforts >>> to remove these freedoms. >>> >>> Edwina >>> >>> Edwina >>> >>> >>> On Sat 04/07/20 12:27 PM , Terry L Rankin [email protected] sent: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Edwina Taborsky >>> Sent: Saturday, July 4, 2020 9:01 AM >>> To: [email protected]; 'Peirce-L' ; [email protected]; Terry L Rankin >>> Subject: Re: RE: RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium >>> >>> >>> >>> ET> Based on your outline - I'm not sure that you and I are in agreement >>> on all points. >>> >>> Apparently I was mistaken to suppose we were. >>> >>> ET> I'm not sure what 'fascist capitalism' means. Fascism is a 'leftist' >>> ideology, promoting the collective vs the individual. Capitalism is an >>> economic ideology, based around the economic enterprises of the private >>> individual. >>> >>> That’s a pretty small minority conception of ‘fascism’ – actually, from >>> Wikipedia, the more common and widely acknowledged conception is that it’s >>> “a form of far-right <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics> >>> , authoritarian <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism> >>> ultranationalism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultranationalism> [1] >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-authoritarian-and-authoritarianism-1> >>> [2] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-2> characterized >>> by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition, as well as strong >>> regimentation of society and of the economy[3] >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-3> which came to >>> prominence in early 20th-century Europe.[4] >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-RoutledgeCompanion-4> The >>> first fascist movements emerged in Italy >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Fascism> during World War I >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I>, before spreading to other >>> European countries <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism_in_Europe>.[4] >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-RoutledgeCompanion-4> >>> Opposed >>> to liberalism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism>, Marxism >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism>, and anarchism >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism>, fascism is placed on the far >>> right within the traditional left–right spectrum >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_spectrum>.[4] >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-RoutledgeCompanion-4> >>> [5] >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-University-Aristotle-Hartley-Wilhelm-Hawkesworth-5> >>> [6] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#cite_note-6>” [emphasis >>> added] >>> >>> ET> What I rejected in James was, as you point out, a totalitarian >>> process, based on his idea of 'the perfect state' - an idea which Popper >>> outlines as found in the ideology of 'historicism'. Historicism is a view >>> based around an innate destiny of a natural [or God-given] destiny of >>> mankind/or a special group - and the path towards some kind of ultimate >>> utopian perfection. Whether found in Plato, or Hegel or Marx - or Mussolini >>> or Hitler or the UN - it relies on an ideology based, as I see it, in the >>> emotional vacuity of a bond between Firstness and Thirdness. That is - it's >>> removed from pragmatic reality. And it is inevitably disastrous. >>> >>> Here, you seem to align James more closely to the common understanding >>> of fascism as given in Wikipedia and quoted above … and, IMHO, rightly so. >>> I struggle with the idea that ideologies (be they religious, philosophical, >>> political, social, scientific, cultural, or whatever) are “removed from >>> practical reality,” however. I find it difficult to reconcile that with the >>> pragmatic maxim Peirce expressed, for example. For me, fascism is the >>> abrogation of the very idea of any form of social contract, which is how >>> and why it is inherently a totalitarian ideology that, as you say, is >>> inevitably disastrous. Indeed, fascism is the tyrannous ground from which >>> the toxic fruits of rapacious unfettered capitalism inevitably spring in >>> abundance. Hence my view that fascist capitalism is the black heart of the >>> global regime running the world today. >>> >>> ET> I prefer Popper's 'piecemeal' bricolage which is based around the >>> individual. I think the US Declaration of Independence, which is one of the >>> greatest documents in history, to be an excellent example of this view. >>> The individual is, of course, an entity grounded in Secondness [as well as >>> 1ns and 3ns] - but all three interact and constantly confront each other >>> with their data and perimeters. >>> >>> On paper, The US DofI indeed is a magnificent manifesto. In practice, >>> especially 244 years later, however, it’s an irrelevant relic – an >>> anachronism – relative to the truth and reality of USAmerica in the 21st >>> century. Along with the Constitution and its Bill of Rights (also a >>> magnificent document), the US DofI is a symbolic cornerstone of our civil >>> religion and its pseudo-patriotic mythology. Together with the >>> red-white-and-blue iconically symbolic US flag and emblematic Eagle, >>> they’ve been completely expunged from social, economic, cultural, and >>> political truth and reality in the US, displaced by the tyranny of >>> alt-right fascist pseudo-Christianity and fascist capitalism. Meanwhile a >>> bitterly divided citizenry stumbles around in the semiotic dissonance of >>> still clinging to the USAmerican mythology and its civil religion, which >>> blocks all discernment of truth and reality, both individually and >>> collectively, with temperamental allergy to rational bricolage being just >>> another pandemic in the world, most virulent and morbid in USAmerica. >>> >>> My apologies for reading into your post to the list what apparently >>> wasn’t there. >>> >>> One Peace, >>> Terry >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri 03/07/20 11:48 PM , Terry L Rankin [email protected] sent: >>> >>> Edwina & list, >>> >>> >>> >>> It seems you and I are in agreement to at least some extent, Edwina, on >>> common Peircean and Popperian grounds. >>> >>> >>> >>> In my Peircean philosophy of science and theistic view, James’ and >>> Dewey’s co-opting and corruption of Peirce’s pragmat(ic)ism facilitated the >>> hybridization of anti- and post-Peircean utilitarian pragmatism with the >>> neopositivist scientism imported from Europe’s Vienna Circle between the >>> Great War and WWII. The subsequent ascent of USAmerican fascist capitalism >>> through the Cold War era to become the contemporary domestic police state >>> and global neoliberalism ruling the world today under its new (World >>> Economic Forum) “Great Reset >>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/now-is-the-time-for-a-great-reset/&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf5edc387b4384606f5c908d8201a4cda%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637294644619301617&sdata=O63SduI%2BVvM8b5Qk7Gle3FIXsAv3AzE3YF8UN92MsjQ%3D&reserved=0>” >>> from “state (fascist) capitalism” through “shareholder (fascist) >>> capitalism” to its latest (as of January this year at Davos) “ >>> stakeholder (fascist) capitalism >>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/12/davos-manifesto-2020-the-universal-purpose-of-a-company-in-the-fourth-industrial-revolution/&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf5edc387b4384606f5c908d8201a4cda%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637294644619316601&sdata=WE/GuGBhmL/tmwnKKB6wgpkypsr93IxenGly5KmJzps%3D&reserved=0>” >>> is, I suggest, exactly the seed of totalitarianism you sense in James, >>> spread now a century later like a genetically engineered toxic kudzu to >>> destroy the planet and most of the life on it in what’s widely acknowledged >>> to be the anthropogenic 6th mass extinction level event on Earth >>> (‘MELEE#6’). The demon seed that spawned the fascist capitalist Fourth >>> Reich we’re in today is that neopositivist scientism fertilizing the >>> pragmatism ovum of utilitarianism to destroy the world and the lifeforms it >>> sustains, including us. >>> >>> >>> >>> Peirce was an existentialist good-faith road not taken at a crossroads >>> that now turns out to have been a fatal mistake. Taking the other path, >>> what James, Dewey, Carnap, Neurath, and others unleashed instead is the >>> worst-faith tyranny of global fascist capitalism to carry the day and >>> humanity’s future into that MELEE#6 truth and reality, the signs of which >>> have just begun to appear in common experience. COVID-19 may in fact be the >>> first death scything in the onrushing bad night into which most of us will >>> go anything but gently before the end of the century if not much sooner. >>> With that ‘perfect society’ delusion as the future agenda, small wonder >>> Harvard all but buried ‘the American Aristotle’ in ignominious penury >>> during his life and beyond his death. That strikes me as an alluring Occam >>> reduction despite the improbability of the elitist power and wealth >>> conspiracism it would require. >>> >>> >>> >>> To the extent that we are in fact aligned on at least some elements of >>> Peirce and Popper in light of the contemporary states of nature, union, and >>> the world at large we’re in today, Edwina, I appreciate the corroboration, >>> however limited it may be. You surely know Peirce far better than I, so >>> wherever you may doubt or dispute my views as stated in this message, >>> please share your thoughts further so I may sharpen my own. Thanks! >>> >>> >>> >>> Still in One Peace, >>> >>> Terry >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Edwina Taborsky >>> Sent: Friday, July 3, 2020 3:45 PM >>> To: 'Peirce-L' ; [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium >>> >>> >>> >>> I personally find the comments by Henry James the elder rather ..I'm not >>> sure of the word. Not merely naïve but possibly alarming. >>> >>> I consider that the agenda to develop a 'perfect society' has always >>> been a basis for totalitarian subjugation - whether it be the socialism of >>> fascism or communism; whether it be an isolate cult or an ideology. >>> >>> Such an agenda, in my view, ignores that we are material, finite >>> entities, and as such in a mode of Secondness, which is a mode of 'brute >>> interaction' - and diversity rather than homogeneity. Furthermore, we >>> cannot ignore that there is no such thing as 'perfection' - whatever that >>> means. Instead, I prefer the 'bricolage' of Karl Popper, his rejection of >>> 'historicism' [vs a theistic interpretation, ie by recognizing God as the >>> author of the play performed on the historical stage" [The Open Society and >>> Its Enemies, p8]. AND the open evolution of both Popper and Peirce, where, >>> with the reality of both Firstness and Secondness and Thirdness - there is >>> no such thing as 'perfect'. >>> >>> Edwina >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri 03/07/20 1:39 PM , [email protected] sent: >>> >>> Gary R, list, >>> >>> I just came across a piece of the reverse side of Turning Signs that >>> strikes me as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's philosophical trivium >>> might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of the >>> world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic” — and relevant in a way >>> that I don’t think has been discussed in this thread before. It’s only a >>> 3-to-5 minute read: >>> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=%3Ca%20href=> >>> http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm%23x14&data=02%7C01%7C%7C197c0bee948f4a6d64b208d81f89951c%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637294023054795065&sdata=/SahKb602KmoK8pzD3QB5QExXhxXRzioBzF6XXL7wAY%3D&reserved=0"; >>> target="_blank"> >>> http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm%23x14&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf5edc387b4384606f5c908d8201a4cda%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637294644619326583&sdata=uYBEhDId04/YjrwZ4vpwOgRUycr1SX1WekzEdhMy8SA%3D&reserved=0 >>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=%3Ca%20href=>" >>> target="_blank"> http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 . >>> >>> Gary f. >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Gary Richmond <[email protected]> >>> Sent: 13-Jun-20 16:04 >>> >>> List, >>> >>> In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It" ( >>> https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb >>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf5edc387b4384606f5c908d8201a4cda%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637294644619331574&sdata=aqXlo8WTQuJIydDhL3hpltDMY3KOoqydd0acNc/L0XM%3D&reserved=0>), >>> Frank >>> Bruni reflects on something I've been informally discussing with friends >>> and colleagues now for years; namely, that "A society without a >>> grounding in ethics, self-reflection, empathy and beauty is one that has >>> lost its way” (Brian Rosenberg, recently president of Macalester >>> College). It seems to me that this has happened in the United States. >>> >>> It has long seemed to me that America today has largely abandoned what >>> might be called the normative trivium of aesthetics, ethics, and logic -- >>> Peirce's three Normative Sciences, not the classical trivium (for which >>> see Sister Miriam Joseph >>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sister_Miriam_Joseph&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf5edc387b4384606f5c908d8201a4cda%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637294644619341557&sdata=VogmzqJ75ExVcQmWPrYZEKDzTFHSUJG35lpxzK4bq18%3D&reserved=0>'s >>> 2002 book, The Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric) >>> that he generalized to serve as the three branches of Logic as Semeiotic. >>> >>> This philosophical trivium points to the possible application of >>> Peirce's three Normative Sciences -- not their theoretical forms, but >>> rather their ordinary and potentially pragmatic guises as they appear in >>> life practice, including reflection and action upon what is beautiful in >>> art and nature, what is ethical in our behavior in the world, and how we >>> can apply 'critical commonsenseism' in our quotidian lives. Bruni writes: " >>> We >>> need writers, philosophers, historians. They’ll be the ones to chart the >>> social, cultural and political challenges of this pandemic -- and of all >>> the other dynamics that have pushed the United States so harrowingly close >>> to the edge. In terms of restoring faith in the American project and >>> reseeding common ground, they’re beyond essential. " >>> >>> Bruni's op-ed reflection came in part in response to a recent article by >>> Rosenberg in The Chronicle of Higher Education ; see "How Should >>> Colleges Prepare for a Post-Pandemic World" ( >>> https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507 >>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf5edc387b4384606f5c908d8201a4cda%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637294644619356532&sdata=qjWd4n2MqpnmohRUgVF6iOri5gIqd7SLEWyWt4nzKV8%3D&reserved=0>). >>> Rosenberg writes: “If one were to invent a crisis uniquely and diabolically >>> designed to undermine the foundations of traditional colleges and >>> universities, it might look very much like the current global pandemic.” In >>> a similar vein, Professor Andrew Belbanco, president of the Teagle >>> Foundation which gives as its purpose promoting the liberal arts, writes: >>> “This >>> is not only a public health crisis and an economic crisis, though Lord >>> knows it’s both of those. It’s also a values crisis. It raises all >>> kinds of deep human questions: What are our responsibilities to other >>> people? Does representative democracy work? How do we get to a place where >>> something like bipartisanship could emerge again?” >>> >>> Commenting on the economic divide of the American university, Bruni >>> notes that "the already pronounced divide between richly endowed, largely >>> residential schools and more socioeconomically diverse ones that depend on >>> public funding grows wider as state and local governments face >>> unprecedented financial distress. A shrinking minority of students get a >>> boutique college experience. Then there’s everybody else." Gail Mellow, >>> former president of LaGuardia College of the City University of New York >>> (where I taught for decades before my retirement) is quoted as saying, “We >>> always knew that America was moving more and more toward very different >>> groups of people," to which Bruni adds, "that movement is only >>> accelerating." >>> >>> Confronting all this will undoubtedly be one of the great challenges >>> that America -- and for that matter, the world -- will have in the years >>> and decades to come. The question I pose is: Can Peirce's version of >>> pragmatism (or pragmaticism) -- which he also calls 'critical >>> commonsenseism' -- creatively contribute to these enormous challenges? And, >>> if so, how? And are there ways in which Peirce's philosophical trivium >>> might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of the >>> world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic? If so, how? >>> >>> >>> >>> [Note: I have Bcc'd this post to several former members of this forum, a >>> few members who rarely if ever post but who have stayed in contact with me >>> offlist, and a few friends and colleagues who have not been members but who >>> may have an interest in this topic. Those who are not current members of >>> the forum may send your thoughts on the topic off-list to me letting me >>> know if I have your permission to post them.] >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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. >>> >>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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.
