Not wishing to be contrarian Ben, but it seems to me that in the early passages you cite Peirce holds a view not dissimilar from his later view. In the whole of his "Science and Immortality" piece of 1887 he is as skeptical as he is later. Only on a superficial reading could one conclude otherwise. What he alludes to I believe is his belief in a necessary universal basis of mind and the "spiritual consciousness" to which he refers is the non-carnal embodied state in which the universal is manifest.
With respect, Steven On Aug 9, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Benjamin Udell wrote: > 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
