Robert, List: No one is suggesting that *phaneroscopy *falls within the sciences of review, Gary R. is simply noting that *Peirce's classification of the sciences* is a work of the sciences of review. Within that classification in its mature form, phaneroscopy is the first positive science, situated between mathematics and the normative sciences.
Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 4:06 AM robert marty <robert.mart...@gmail.com> wrote: > Gary R., List > > > > Your opinion that De Tienne : > > > > *"**emphasizes in that aspect of his presentation having the purpose of > positioning phaneroscopy within Peirce's Classification of Sciences, a > work, btw, of Science of Review, concerned with > sciences qua scientific disciplines as distinct from how the knowledge of > each of these will be employed in the actual work of any given scientist or > group of sciences*.*"* > > > > seems to me very appropriate; indeed, it completely changes the nature of > the debate by discarding the conflict because: > > > > *"By "science of review" is meant the business of those who occupy > themselves with arranging the results of discovery, beginning with digests, > and going on to endeavor to form a philosophy of science*."(CP 1.182, AN > OUTLINE CLASSIFICATION OF THE SCIENCES) > > > By placing the activity of the phaneroscopists in this branch of the > Classification of Sciences, it not depends directly on the Sciences of > Discovery and one understands better than the insistence of De Tiennne to > distance himself from Mathematics. For the "phaneroscopists" would draw > "the results of discovery,"* without having the responsibility of their > elaboration* and would import them among the Sciences of Review, in which > they would assume a necessary work "beginning with digests, and going on to > endeavor to form a philosophy of science". A critical work quite > indispensable. > > For Peirce, classifications are general, that nobody is enclosed in a > branch and that each can deploy his activity by passing from one to another > if he has the desire and the competence. > > > > Sincerely, > > Robert Marty > Honorary Professor; Ph.D. Mathematics; Ph.D. Philosophy > fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty > *https://martyrobert.academia.edu/ <https://martyrobert.academia.edu/>* >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
