Gary R.: GR: I'm curious if you know of anything anywhere as extensive as this written by Peirce on the Science of Review.
No, but Alessandro Topa provides a thorough compilation and analysis of what Peirce *did *say about the science of review in a 2019 *Transactions *article (https://doi.org/10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.55.3.04). Regards, Jon S. On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 6:13 PM Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jon, List, > > JAS: Actually, [Peirce] wrote a long manuscript on the subject--over > 18,000 words--intended as a chapter of *Minute Logic* and entitled, "Of > the Classification of the Sciences. Second Paper. Of the Practical > Sciences" (R 1343, 1902) > > > I would be very interested in reading your transcription and, so, will > write you off List next week to remind you to send it to me (I'm having a > medical procedure towards the end of the week and may find it difficult to > concentrate over the next few days). > > I'm curious if you know of anything anywhere as extensive as this written > by Peirce on the Science of Review. > > Best, > > Gary R > > “Let everything happen to you > Beauty and terror > Just keep going > No feeling is final” > ― Rainer Maria Rilke > *Gary Richmond* > *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* > *Communication Studies* > *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* > > On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 6:12 PM Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Gary R., List: >> >> GR: ... *Practical Sciences* (what we today refer to as applied arts and >> sciences, which Peirce holds to be far too many to even list so that he >> never offers any more than just a few diverse examples of them) ... >> >> >> Actually, he wrote a long manuscript on the subject--over 18,000 >> words--intended as a chapter of *Minute Logic* and entitled, "Of the >> Classification of the Sciences. Second Paper. Of the Practical Sciences" (R >> 1343, 1902). I transcribed it a few years ago, and anyone interested in >> reading it is welcome to send me an e-mail off-List. Peirce begins with a >> classification of human instincts, which then serves as the basis for his >> classification of the practical sciences. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA >> Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian >> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt >> >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 4:25 PM Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Robert, Jon, List: >>> >>> JAS: 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. >>> >>> >>> That is in my view essentially correct. Yet in a certain sense the >>> phrase, "*Classification of the Sciences" *isn't quite accurate even >>> though it's Peirce's own. I say this because Peirce divides the totality of >>> *Science* into three grand groups, namely, *Sciences of Discovery* (the >>> theoretical science which he outlines in his familiar "*classification >>> of the sciences*"), *Practical Sciences* (what we today refer to as >>> applied arts and sciences, which Peirce holds to be far too many to even >>> list so that he never offers any more than just a few diverse examples of >>> them), and *Science of Review* (which includes such outlines as his >>> classifications of the sciences of discovery as well as less broad >>> classifications as his classification of signs within logic as semeiotic, >>> philosophy of science, etc.) >>> >>> In his classification, Peirce introduces a overarching tripartite >>> division between three branches of science: science of discovery. . .; >>> science >>> of review, which encompasses any science classification, as well as >>> history of science (*EP2*, 258–259; 458); and practical science or >>> science “for the uses of life” (*CP* 1.239), for example, “pedagogics, >>> […] vulgar arithmetic, horology, surveying, navigation, […] librarian’s >>> work” (*CP* 1.243) [12] <https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce#e12>. >>> Although Peirce’s classification focuses mostly on sciences of the first >>> branch, the fact that the two last branches are included may give pause to >>> reflect on their significance for the classification as a whole. >>> https://www.isko.org/cyclo/peirce >>> >>> >>> I agree with Torjus Midtgarden that there being three 'grand sciences' >>> (or three grand branches of science) ought to give us "pause to reflect on >>> their significance for the classification as a whole. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Gary R >>> >>> “Let everything happen to you >>> Beauty and terror >>> Just keep going >>> No feeling is final” >>> ― Rainer Maria Rilke >>> *Gary Richmond* >>> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* >>> *Communication Studies* >>> *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* >>> >>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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.
