Robert, list
Another thought - the earlier/faster the individual moves into the
commonalities of Thirdness, and away from the individual experience
of Secondness - the stronger the possibility of 'magical
conclusions'.
Equally, it is difficult for the individual to move out of the
communal bond into a focus on individual objective experience. I
always consider that it takes at least three generations for a
society to change a core belief.
Edwina
On Thu 24/09/20 1:05 PM , Edwina Taborsky [email protected] sent:
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}Robert, list
As I am working through your dense, excellent analysis - I've a few
comments;
1] I note that we seem to move through 7 steps in a cognitive
process...
2] The role of RIL, a rhematic indexical legisign . It can assist in
grounding the input stimuli in reality but it seems more likely to
assist in moving the receiver into a belief - ie, moving from RIL to
RS rather than DIL.
3] But how many of our opinions are exactly that - since we set up
the 5th step as one where we 'have faith' in the experiences of
whoever is, as 'expert', advising us.
that is - when does the movement from an individual experience of
stimulus [be it words or whatever] move into the reliance on the
community ...it seems to happen quickly. And this reliance then, as
you outline, moves very strongly into a path of 'magical thinking'.
Edwina
On Wed 23/09/20 5:11 PM , "John F. Sowa" [email protected] sent:
Robert,
I thought that the following paragraph in your article was
especially informative:
From the "Five paths" article": We now have a semiotic tool of
greater scope than the lattice itself, since it does not only
classify signs, but also "streams of signs", that is, interpretative
habits that have been inscribed in these paths and, as a result, have
become communal semiotic characteristics. The lattices of the five
paths (Table 5) therefore also classify the social histories of the
modes of interpretation of signs
The words 'communal' and 'social' remind me of Peirce's discussion
of the "collateral experience" that the reader, viewer or listener
uses to interpret signs. Following is the definition from the
Commens Dictionary:
1908 [c.] | Letters to Lady Welby | MS [R] L463:14: "A Sign may
bring before the Mind, a new hypothesis, or a sentiment, a quality, a
respect, a degree, a thing, an event, a law, etc. But it never can
convey anything to a person who has not had a direct experience or at
least original self-experience of the same object, collateral
experience."
Depending on their collateral experience, the person who interprets
a sign may ffine a degenerate interpretation or an accretive
interpretation. The five paths show the possible kinds of
differences -- degenerate or accretive. Although there are just five
kinds of paths, each kind may have very different accretions or
deletions, depending on the collateral experience of the person who
interprets the sign.
In my case, I had collateral experience that suggested some rather
distracting thoughts while I was reading your article. The words
'nicotine', 'stream', and 'French' reminded me of a class in fluid
mechanics that I attended many years ago.
The professor recommended Gaulois Cigarettes -- not for smoking, but
for wind-tunnel experiments. The Gaulois smoke is so thick that it
doesn't dissipate in a wind tunnel. It shows very clear streams in
the flow.
Locke and others talked about "association of ideas". Peirce said
that those ideas roughly correspond to his "experiences in the
phaneron". There is an enormous range of possible variations among
different interpreters,
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 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.
