Cathy, yes, Deacon’s “absence” is the absence of existing things, concrete physical objects or actual events. (This was not clear to me from his first chapter but does become clear later in the book.) He wouldn’t use the term “Being” in the way that Peirce does, but he is arguing against the tendency in biological psychology to reduce all causality to efficient causes, which are necessarily present as actualities. So he affirms the reality of formal and final causes, neither of which is present in that sense (the presence of Secondness, i think Peirce would call it.) Deacon’s universe is not very Platonic, it’s more Aristotelian.
Jon, yes, “incompleteness” has been on the mathematical agenda since Gödel’s famous paper, but Deacon’s argument is essentially non-mathematical; he mentions Gödel only once and briefly, and doesn’t mention people like Rosen at all. I think Rosen’s idea that a living organism (anticipatory system) is one that has no largest model is very similar to what Deacon is driving at. But Deacon would have no use for that approach because he deliberately restricts himself to physics (whereas Rosen thought that physics was not generic enough to encompass life). He doesn’t have much use for mathematical complexity theory either. I don’t think the main thrust of Deacon’s argument is all that original – it’s not really different from what Peirce argued, for one thing – what’s original (in my view anyway) is Deacon’s concepts of orthograde and contragrade change, and teleodynamics, which allow him to build his argument for the reality of final causality in purely physical terms (and without appealing to ‘quantum weirdness’). Gary F. } We are but whirlpools in a river of ever-flowing water. We are not stuff that abides, but patterns that perpetuate themselves. [Norbert Wiener] { <http://www.gnusystems.ca/Peirce.htm> www.gnusystems.ca/Peirce.htm }{ gnoxic studies: Peirce From: C S Peirce discussion list [mailto:PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU] On Behalf Of Catherine Legg Sent: March-13-12 10:41 PM Very rich post, Gary (F), thank you! I've recently been alerted to the importance of Deacon by Gary (R) and he is now 'on my list'. On the interesting issue of Deacon's 'Absence' which you raise in the last paragraph, I wonder whether the Absent is absent from Being or just the actual world. If the latter, perhaps it is not entirely inaccessible to a Peircean phaneroscopy fearlessly navigating the Platonic Universe. Cheers, Cathy --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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