List,
Of course, we are post-Peirceans! How could we be pre-Peirceans or even
just Peirceans...!!!
this pretentious behavior, the gratuitous aggression and the silence of
others is the reason way I left writing to the List some years ago
"Some *'literalists' *think we should leave the forest as it is.Every
time they get in the way, which keeps happening, there's a big problem."
(RM; emphasis mine)
And ET insists in this direction by pretentiously stating "I'm beginning
to think that the Peirce-List is not equipped to handle the exploration
of Peirce and his analytic framework in the 21st century", apparently
*she *is...???
Peirce himself was aware of the limits of his possibilities, like quoted
by JS with CP 5.488 and CP 2.1.
But apparently there are still some that want us to stick to the
misconception that "the weather-wain is an index"... instead of a
complex sign.
Already after more than 150 years of the first writings by Peirce we are
not able to move on... like it happens with the Bible... or with The
Capital... and here we are!
Hope that a creation of a new List will overcome this retrograde
positions that don't help anyone... not even the sacred memory of Peirce
himself.
All the best
Claudio
sowa @bestweb.net escribió el 15/10/2021 a las 19:02:
List,
On Thursday, I sent the note below to Peirce-L. I received some
strong positive comments and suggestions offline, but complete silence
from the people who send most of the notes to Peirce-L. For
example: "As for the natural extensions of Peirce's thought, even
when they agree closely with his principles, they are rejected [on
Peirce-L] as post-Peircean"
I interpret those responses as evidence that we need n email list that
is dedicated to the kinds of topics that dominated the Peirce
Centennial Congress in 2014. That was a very exciting conference on
research that builds on Peirce's work and relates it to developments
in the century after Peirce. As Peirce frequently emphasized, the
meaning of any sign is its implications for action in the future. We
live in Peirce's future, and our actions today depend critically on
the developments in the century after Peirce.
I don't believe that we should reject Peirce-l, but we should have
another email list that relates Peirce's ideas to the issues of
today. I would encourage subscribers to Peirce-L to participate in
both lists. I'll send another note tomorrow..
John
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From*: "sowa @bestweb.net" <s...@bestweb.net>
*Sent*: Thursday, October 14, 2021 10:39 PM
*To*: "Peirce-L" <peirce-l@list.iupui.edu>
*Subject*: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's contributions to the 21st century
Robert, Edwina, List,
The passages Robert quoted show that Peirce admitted that his system
was a work in progress. We could add his remark that phaneroscopy was
still a "science egg".
CSP: I am, as far as I know, a pioneer, or rather a backwoodsman, in
the work of clearing and opening up what I call semiotic, that is, the
doctrine of the essential nature and fundamental varieties of possible
semiosis; and I find the field too vast, the labor too great, for a
first-comer. I am, accordingly, obliged to confine myself to the most
important questions. (CP 5.488)
CSP: All that you can find in print of my work on logic are simply
scattered outcroppings here and there of a rich vein which remains
unpublished. Most of it I suppose has been written down; but no human
being could ever put together the fragments. I could not myself do
so. (CP 2.1)
RM: we must make, collectively and in the long run, a rational
representative construction of Peirce's work that is communicable with
a minimum of effort. To reach this goal, we must not fall into a
dialogue of the deaf. We are also backwoodsmen in the traces left by
Peirce; faithful to his spirit there are several of us on this list
who follow and develop some of these traces. We find them
particularly relevant because we have new tools. Some literalists
think we should leave the forest as it is. Every time they get in the
way, which keeps happening, there's a big problem.
ET: Thank you Robert, for this analysis. But I'm beginning to think
that the Peirce-List is not equipped to handle the exploration of
Peirce and his analytic framework in the 21st century. After all -
some of us have been trying for years to introduce current scientific
and other research areas [linguistic, AI, societal, economic] and
explore how the Peircean framework, in different terms, is being used
to examine these fields. We've been met with a refusal to engage in
any discussion and/or, an open almost horror of such an approach.
That is an issue that should be considered.
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 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.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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.
