John
From: "Jeffrey Brian Downard"
Sent: 4/8/24 12:35 AM
To: "Michael J.J. Tiffany" ,
"s...@bestweb.net"
Cc: Peirce List
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Zoom lecture on the CSP's role in philosophy of science
(U Pitt)
Hello Michael and John,
Nice
Flagstaff, AZ
Philosophy, NAU
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu on
behalf of Michael J.J. Tiffany
Date: Sunday, April 7, 2024 at 10:57 AM
To: s...@bestweb.net
Cc: Peirce List
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Zoom lecture on the CSP's role in philosophy of science
(U Pitt)
John, List:
I agree
Jerry
This section is, I believe,from 1868 - and there are more descriptions of the
categories elsewhere., eg. 8/328 1904.
The three terms you reference - quality, relation, representation] can be
understood to refer to Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness.The categories, are
‘modes of being’, o
Dear Edwinia, List
> On Apr 7, 2024, at 1:09 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote:
>
> And I also am a strong supporter of Peirce’s three categories, with the
> interplay between Firstnerss [ randomnness, chance, freedom]; steady-state
> interaction [Secondness] and the development of new habits of orga
ld, is, as it seems to me,
>> illogical in all his inferences, collectively.” To social Darwinism, and to
>> the related sort of thinking that constituted for Herbert Spencer and others
>> a supposed justification for the more rapacious practices of unbridled
>> capital
ral, of course. But your
> admonition to relate Peirce to our 21st century world nudged me into
> sharing the idea.
>
> *From:* peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu > *On Behalf Of *John F Sowa
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 6, 2024 5:53 PM
> *To:* Jerry LR Chandler ; Peirce List
Jerry,
Thanks for that note. The following sentence shows why we need to relate
Peirce's writings to the latest and greatest work that is being done today:
>From the abstract: "C.S. Peirce, however, is not generally considered a
>canonical figure in the history of philosophy of science."
I
