Benjamin Udell wrote:
Jean-Marc,
I spoke of the three trichotomies, not the five or six or ten. If you don't
address what's said, why do you bother sending posts to a place like peirce-l?
If you do not address this structure, specifically,
the 1st trichotomy pertains to the sign's own category,
the 2nd to the category in which the sign refers to its object, and
the 3rd to the category in which the sign entails its interpretant.
then I think that you lose this argument by sheer default.
Best, Ben UDell.
the same three trichotomies that you mention also appear also in the 6
and the 10 trichotomies in a different order.
you obviously don't understand what you are writing about.
/JM
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
