NH = Nathan Houser
NH: JR began this paper by pointing out that Peirce conceived of semiotics
as a foundational theory capable of unifying sub-theories dealing with
communication, meaning, and inference. This may call for some discussion.
He then claims that 90% of Peirce's "prodigious philosophical output" is
directly concerned with semiotic." This is an odd claim in a way since it
does not seem to be straightforwardly true. How can we make sense of it?
From my sense of Peirce's work, I would have say that I agree with the claim
that Joe makes on this point, even if I can't say whether it would be for any
of the same reasons he had in mind. Understanding Peirce's pragmatism depends
on understanding sign relations, triadic relations, and relations in general,
all of which forms the conceptual framework of his theory of inquiry and his
theory of signs.
Regards,
Jon
--
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
policy mic: www.policymic.com/profile/show?id=1110
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L listserv. To
remove yourself from this list, send a message to lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with the
line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the message. To post a message to the
list, send it to PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
