Jack, List: Again, if the "thing in itself" can be inferred, then it can be represented and is not incognizable after all. So, Peirce was right and Kant was wrong.
Thanks, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 1:46 PM JACK ROBERT KELLY CODY < [email protected]> wrote: > The disagreement is about whether a complete representation of an object > would be impossible in principle, even in the infinite future after > infinite inquiry by an infinite community; Kant says yes, Peirce says no. > > Yes, to this I go directly. I say I have proven Kant is correct here via > the "thing in itself" which by logical series and deconstruction of the > mediatory process itself, must be inferred. As it is "in itself", it can > never be, to us, "as it is in itself". > > Best > > Jack > >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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 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.
