Gary F., Stephen, Steven, In "Immortality in the Light of Synechism" (1893, retitled "Immortality and Synechism" by the CP editors), Peirce says. CP 7.576. Nor is this, by any means, all. A man is capable of a spiritual consciousness, which constitutes him one of the eternal verities, which is embodied in the universe as a whole. This as an archetypal idea can never fail; and in the world to come is destined to a special spiritual embodiment.
CP 7.577 [....] In the same manner, when the carnal consciousness passes away in death, we shall at once perceive that we have had all along a lively spiritual consciousness which we have been confusing with something different. But it's clear as all of you point out, that in 1906 (in CP 6.520-21), Peirce was much less sure about immortality. 1887 - contributes a chapter http://books.google.com/books?id=V9wPAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA69 to a symposium on "Science and Immortality". Doubtful about immortality. CP 6.548-56. 1893 - "Immortality in the Light of Synechism," immortality & survival after carnal death. CP 7.565-78, EP 2:1-3 1906 - "Immortality" (in "Answers to Questions concerning My Belief in God") - Not sure about immortality or life after death "content to be in God's hands" CP 6.519-21. Best, Ben ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Ericsson-Zenith" To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 12:31 PM Subject: Re: [peirce-l] Slow Read: "Teleology and the Autonomy of the Semiosis Process" I can't say that I've seen anything to this effect either. Earlier in the passage Gary cites he states his position quite clearly: CP 6.519. "Do you believe in a future life?" Some kind of a future life there can be no doubt of. A man of character leaves an influence living after him. It is living: it is personal. In my opinion, it is quite proper to call that a future life. Jesus so spoke of it when he said he would always be with us. It is in some respects more fit to be made the subject of a promise than any other kind of future life. For it is something we all desire; while other kinds present nothing alluring that is not excessively vague or else unwholesome and antipractical. In the next place its vivacity and endurance are proportional to the spirituality of the man. How many instances have we seen of that! Beyond that, I simply am content to be in God's hands. If I am in another life it is sure to be most interesting; but I cannot imagine how it is going to be me. At the same time, I really don't know anything about it. Given his analysis of the "God" concept elsewhere, I think we can conclude that he did not hold a view stronger than the above. He appears to find it very hard to let go of the notion of "God" and this is, I think, the influence of his father who saw in the notion of "Will" something universal that led him to affirm the existence of "God." Reading Benjamin Peirce helps us understand much of Charles' thinking in these matters and both derive much influence from the European Enlightenment. With respect, Steven On Aug 9, 2011, at 4:08 AM, Gary Fuhrman wrote: > Ben, you wrote: > > [[Peirce believed in a spiritual consciousness, a soul-consciousness, > confusable with social and carnal kinds of consciousness but becoming clear > to one, as Peirce came to believe, in surviving the body's death. ]] > > Can you cite a text where Peirce says this? He does speak of a “spiritual > consciousness” but i haven’t seen any place where he speaks of this as the > consciousness of an individual soul surviving the body’s death, or expresses > belief in that kind of afterlife. He argues rather against it in CP 6.548-52 > (1887), and again in CP 6.520-21 (c.1906), though he also says that the > possibility can’t be ruled out, precisely because it’s virtually impossible > to investigate. The “immortality” of which he speaks “in the light of > synechism” is of a very different kind, it seems to me, to which the survival > of the individual consciousness or ‘soul’ is quite irrelevant. > > Gary F. > > } Every man is tasked to make his life, even in its details, worthy of the > contemplation of his most elevated and critical hour. [Thoreau] { > > www.gnusystems.ca/gnoxic.htm }{ home > > > > From: C S Peirce discussion list [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Benjamin Udell > Sent: August-08-11 8:15 PM > > > Drake, > > > For Peirce, truth is immutable so for him in some sense all truths are > eternal. Perhaps in "Immortality in the Light of Synechism" he was thinking > about something like truths _about_ eternity, the soul, etc. > > Not having been religious since I was a kid, I don't easily put myself into > that frame of mind. > > I don't know whether he thought that that which he called eternal truths > require or enliven spiritual consciousness. He might have thought that it > helps to have lively spiritual consciousness in order to apprehend eternal > spiritual truths in the right spirit, to learn of them and learn from them, > and even that such truths don't come through well when translated into > everyday conversation, but I just don't know. I also wonder whether he > thought that such truths could be equally well simple or complex like a > scientific theory; it can be pretty hard to guess about such things with > Peirce. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to [email protected] with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the message. To post a message to the list, send it to [email protected]
