II fully agree with you - Darwinism and neo-Darwinism- and Peirce was sceptical of Darwinism - most certainly can’t describe altruism, kin selection and even, he fact that a species does NOT evolve to ’the best’. That’s why Peirces’ agapism is a deeper analytic path to delve into for biological truths.
And yes- I agree that Peirce’s framework is a ‘fecund’ base for scientific advances - but- most scientists don’t know about his work - and I think that many Peircean scholars, with their insistence on using’ only Peirce’s words’ ..are hindering the use of Peirce in scientific disciplines. That’s why I get so upset when I am chastised for using a term [ eg, input/output etc] and told that Peirce didn’t’ say that…The Peircean texts are not sacred texts; they are incredible analyses of the world..and should be open to such a use. So- yes, it’s a great pity that current science is ignorant of the Peircean framework.. Edwina > On Sep 29, 2024, at 5:59 PM, Mike Bergman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Edwina, List, > > Your points are all well taken. However, I prefer to look at your rhetorical > question in the inverse. > > Our science writ large has been stuck in some very telling ways. The standard > model of particle physics has been stymied and has not overcome many > perplexing questions for more than 50 years. The standard model of cosmology > has been stuck for 30 years since we learned of the universe's increasing > expansion. Gravity defies incorporation into a theory of everything. > Darwinian evolution and neo-Darwinism have been unable to describe altruism > and kin selection. Neither account for the 'finious' or teleological aspects > as well. Epigenetics suggest much more is at work than conventional genetic > theory. Determinism and reductionism continue (in my opinion) to unduly lock > science into inquisitive dead ends. > > The broad framework of Peirce's universal categories and the process of > semiosis offer, I think both of us believe, more fecund bases for conducting > future science than what is being pursued at present. While it is true that > Peirce's work preceded the scientific advances of the early 20th century, > they foreshadowed all of them. Furthermore, there are legitimate theories > across all current scientific disciplines that can be seen as expressions of > these Peircean insights, often without the explicit knowledge of their > proponents about possible connections to Peirce. > > So, to me, the pity is not so much that Peirce was in advance of later valid > science but that current science is largely ignorant of Peirce. As you know > this has been a passion of mine. What is needed is a re-expression of many > current theories consistent with a Peircean interpretation. I think (know) we > will see such an approach will help filter amongst competing alternate > theories in these areas of open scientific question, which in combination > will also reify Peirce's impressive instincts. Getting more researchers to > embrace Peirce in their own work will break some of these logjams, and bring > additional minds to bear to help further elucidate Peirce's insights. > > We have sufficient knowledge at hand to move this enterprise forward. > > My Sunday musings, Mike > > On 9/29/2024 2:10 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: >> List >> >> I sometimes wonder/wish - what would it have been like - if Peirce had lived >> for another 10-15 years? Would his concepts be validated by the advances in >> the scientific world? >> >> 1] What about his outline of the emergence of the universe [1.412; 6.217]- >> The idea of an expanding, evolving universe, which emerged from a >> singularity of density [potentiality?] as Peirce outlines it in 1.412, can >> be compared with the 1920’s and 1930’s scientific proposals [Friedmann, >> Lemaitre] of the emergence of the universe from a dense singularity. >> >> 2] His concept that - there was ‘no time’ in this phase - has also been >> scientifically shown as valid. >> >> 3] What about the electromagnetic force - one of the four fundamental >> forces? I have always defined the Semiotic process of O-R-I >> [Object-Representamen-Interpretant ] as comparable to a function, ie, where >> F(X)=Y ..or.. Representamen/Sign [Object)=Interpretant. >> >> But in addition, an analogy can be made with the electromagnetic force, >> which is an interaction that occurs between particles with electric charge >> via electromagnetic fields. I’d compare a magnetic field to the semiosic >> process, where one vector, B is the magnetic induction [compare with the >> Object’s data]; and the other vector , H, is the magnetic fields >> intensity/strength [ ie, the strength of the Interpretant’s informational >> content. >> >> It’s interesting that in a vacuum [ infinity???] B and H are proportional to >> each other, but inside matter, they are different - which fits in with the >> notion of an evolving or different interpretant. >> >> 4] And of course, his concepts of the reality of chance/freedom as well as >> the developments of stable patterns - have also been scientifically >> validated. >> >> Just another decade or two- would have shown, scientifically, the validity >> of his theories. >> >> Edwina >> >> >> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ >> ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at >> https://cspeirce.com <https://cspeirce.com/> and, just as well, at >> https://www.cspeirce.com <https://www.cspeirce.com/> . It'll take a while >> to repair / update all the links! >> ► 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] <mailto:[email protected]> . >> ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] >> <mailto:[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. > -- > __________________________________________ > > Michael K. Bergman > 319.621.5225 > http://mkbergman.com <http://mkbergman.com/> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/mkbergman > __________________________________________
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► 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.
