Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium

[Jerry Rhee]

Hi Gary, list,

You said:
"Secondly, why speak of Peirce's normatives sciences of esthetics, ethics,
and logic as "exalted"?
Who "exalts" them? What a strange expression to use about these sciences."

Is it not *we Peirceans,* who exalts the normative sciences?
I mean, *everybody* knows what the normative sciences are,
which investigates the universal and necessary laws of the relation of
Phenomena to *Ends*, that is, perhaps, to Truth, Right, and Beauty.
And is it not ends that are exalted?
I mean, if Truth Right and Beauty is not exalted, then what, amirite?

Moreover, need we quibble over the definition of 'exalted"?

I mean, any of these dictionary meanings will qualify..

hold (someone or something) in very high regard; think or speak very highly
of.
"the party will continue to exalt its hero"

revere
reverence
venerate
worship
hero-worship
lionize
idolize
deify
esteem
hold in high regard
hold in high esteem
hold in awe
look up to
put on a pedestal
laud
magnify
Opposite:
disparage
despise

   - raise to a higher rank or a position of greater power.
   "this naturally exalts the peasant above his brethren in the same rank
   of society"
   - make noble in character; dignify.
   -

So, if you are so offended that I speak here for the community,
so offended that you think you ought to say something in contradiction to
what I say,
then please feel free to say something opposite to that of exalting the
normative sciences.
I mean, what's left but to say that we ought to denigrate or ignore it..
or worse yet, treat it like any other.

That is, rather than exalting the Normative Sciences,
any esthetics will do.
any ethics will do.
any logic will do.

That is what we value, then..  as Peirceans, that is..

With best wishes,
Jerry R

On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 3:03 PM Gary Richmond 
wrote:

> Jerry, Gary F,
>
> Jerry, first, I would like to know why you -- or, for that matter, anyone
> -- can speak for all list members on any matter? ("like everyone else on
> this list")
>
> Secondly, why speak of Peirce's normatives sciences of esthetics, ethics,
> and logic as "exalted"? Who "exalts" them? What a strange expression to use
> about these sciences.
>
> Thirdly, Peirce's philosophical trivium (i.e., the normative sciences) has
> hardly been neglected and, in fact, has been widely discussed in the
> literature for almost a century now. While his logic as semeiotic has
> perhaps been the *most *discussed -- and that to this day--, his ethics
> has gotten considerable scholarly treatment for decades now, while his
> esthetics is only recently being more fully explored. In short, there are
> books and book chapters, monographs, and myriad published essays on the
> normative sciences.
>
> Finally, have you read the passage Gary F linked to? If not, that *might *be
> helpful to you in answering your question. I wouldn't concentrate on the
> James the Elder quote which is not, I don't believe, at all in itself why
> GF posted the link and shouldn't be taken out of *that *context.
>
> Best,
>
> Gary R
>
> "Time is not a renewable resource." gnox
>
> *Gary Richmond*
> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
> *Communication Studies*
> *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> 
> <#m_3937679862003297641_m_-6051862502008732852_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jerry Rhee  wrote:
>
>> Gary F, list,
>>
>> I, like everyone else on this list I'm sure, am curious as to learn more
>> about what you mean by this.
>> Please elaborate, for we all stand in need of a clear explanation for why
>> it is that a thing as exalted as Peirce's Trivium is merely being
>> neglected, don't you agree?
>>
>> So please, tell us, "Why then had it not been put to its serious use?"
>>
>> With best wishes,
>> Jerry R
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 12:39 PM  wrote:
>>
>>> Gary R, list,
>>>
>>> I just came across a piece of the reverse side of *Turning Signs* that
>>> strikes me as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's philosophical
>>> trivium might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of
>>> the world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic” — and relevant in a
>>> way that I don’t think has been discussed in this thread before. It’s only
>>> a 3-to-5 minute read: http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 .
>>>
>>> Gary f.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Gary Richmond 
>>> *Sent:* 13-Jun-20 16:04
>>>
>>> List,
>>>
>>> In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It" (
>>> https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb), Frank Bruni reflects on something I've
>>> been informally discussing with friends and colleagues now for years;
>>> namely, that "A society without a grounding in ethics, self-reflection,
>>> empathy and beauty is one that has lost 

Aw: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium

[Helmut Raulien]

Im agree with Edwina. I also agree, that a perfect society is one of social sphere omnipresence and omnipotence, leaving the individuals merely spontaneity, and no will. They are reduced to firstness, but what is done with this their residual spontaneity, secondness and thirdness, is only a matter of the collective, not of the individual. The dystopy of the Borg-hive in "Star-Trek" shows a good example. A perfect society is a quasi-organism, that has reduced individuals to its organs, a fascist dream. Though this perfect society is completely malicious, it denies the existence of maliciousness (3dness badness), and acting badness (2ns badness), and claims , that badness like hatred is merely 1ns, absence of light. It after all has, keeps, and veils its badness-monopol.

I agree with Edwina´s recommendation of Karl Popper. I think, that there is a natural enmity between individual and social system, and that the individuals have always to see to keep the social system under control, so it shall never get anywhere near perfect. Measures for that are e.g. separation of powers, human and civil rights, freedom of press and speech, and so on.

 

Best, Helmut

 
 

 03. Juli 2020 um 21:44 Uhr
 "Edwina Taborsky" 
wrote:


I personally find the comments by Henry James the elder rather ..I'm not sure of the word. Not merely naïve but possibly alarming.

I consider that the agenda to develop a 'perfect society' has always been a basis for totalitarian subjugation - whether it be the socialism of fascism or communism; whether it be an isolate cult or an ideology.

Such an agenda, in my view, ignores that we are material, finite entities, and as such in a mode of Secondness, which is a mode of 'brute interaction' - and diversity rather than homogeneity. Furthermore,  we cannot ignore that there is no such thing as 'perfection' - whatever that means. Instead, I prefer the 'bricolage' of Karl Popper, his rejection of 'historicism' [vs a theistic interpretation, ie by recognizing God as the author of the play performed on the historical stage" [The Open Society and Its Enemies, p8]. AND the open evolution of both Popper and Peirce, where, with the reality of both Firstness and Secondness and Thirdness - there is no such thing as 'perfect'.

Edwina

 

On Fri 03/07/20 1:39 PM , g...@gnusystems.ca sent:




Gary R, list,

I just came across a piece of the reverse side of  Turning Signs that strikes me as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's philosophical trivium might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of the world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic” — and relevant in a way that I don’t think has been discussed in this thread before. It’s only a 3-to-5 minute read:  http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 .

Gary f.

 

From:  Gary Richmond 
Sent: 13-Jun-20 16:04
 







List,



In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It" (https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb), Frank Bruni reflects on something I've been informally discussing with friends and colleagues now for years; namely, that "A society without a grounding in ethics, self-reflection, empathy and beauty is one that has lost its way” (Brian Rosenberg, recently  president of Macalester College). It seems to me that this has happened in the United States.




It has long seemed to me that America today has largely abandoned what might be called the normative trivium of aesthetics, ethics, and logic -- Peirce's three Normative Sciences,  not the classical trivium (for which see Sister Miriam Joseph's 2002 book, The Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric) that he generalized to serve as the three branches of Logic as Semeiotic.



This philosophical trivium points to the possible application of Peirce's three Normative Sciences -- not their theoretical forms, but rather their ordinary and potentially pragmatic guises as they appear in life practice, including reflection and action upon what is beautiful in art and nature, what is ethical in our behavior in the world, and how we can apply 'critical commonsenseism' in our quotidian lives. Bruni writes: " We need writers, philosophers, historians. They’ll be the ones to chart the social, cultural and political challenges of this pandemic -- and of all the other dynamics that have pushed the United States so harrowingly close to the edge. In terms of restoring faith in the American project and reseeding common ground, they’re beyond essential. "



Bruni's op-ed reflection came in part in response to a recent article by Rosenberg in The Chronicle of Higher Education ; see "How Should Colleges Prepare for a Post-Pandemic World" (https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507). Rosenberg writes: “If one were to invent a crisis uniquely and diabolically designed to undermine the foundations of traditional colleges and universities, it might look very much like the current global pandemic.” In a similar vein, 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium

[Gary Richmond]

Jerry, Gary F,

Jerry, first, I would like to know why you -- or, for that matter, anyone
-- can speak for all list members on any matter? ("like everyone else on
this list")

Secondly, why speak of Peirce's normatives sciences of esthetics, ethics,
and logic as "exalted"? Who "exalts" them? What a strange expression to use
about these sciences.

Thirdly, Peirce's philosophical trivium (i.e., the normative sciences) has
hardly been neglected and, in fact, has been widely discussed in the
literature for almost a century now. While his logic as semeiotic has
perhaps been the *most *discussed -- and that to this day--, his ethics has
gotten considerable scholarly treatment for decades now, while his
esthetics is only recently being more fully explored. In short, there are
books and book chapters, monographs, and myriad published essays on the
normative sciences.

Finally, have you read the passage Gary F linked to? If not, that *might *be
helpful to you in answering your question. I wouldn't concentrate on the
James the Elder quote which is not, I don't believe, at all in itself why
GF posted the link and shouldn't be taken out of *that *context.

Best,

Gary R

"Time is not a renewable resource." gnox

*Gary Richmond*
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*Communication Studies*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*








Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#m_-6051862502008732852_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:55 PM Jerry Rhee  wrote:

> Gary F, list,
>
> I, like everyone else on this list I'm sure, am curious as to learn more
> about what you mean by this.
> Please elaborate, for we all stand in need of a clear explanation for why
> it is that a thing as exalted as Peirce's Trivium is merely being
> neglected, don't you agree?
>
> So please, tell us, "Why then had it not been put to its serious use?"
>
> With best wishes,
> Jerry R
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 12:39 PM  wrote:
>
>> Gary R, list,
>>
>> I just came across a piece of the reverse side of *Turning Signs* that
>> strikes me as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's philosophical
>> trivium might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of
>> the world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic” — and relevant in a
>> way that I don’t think has been discussed in this thread before. It’s only
>> a 3-to-5 minute read: http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 .
>>
>> Gary f.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Gary Richmond 
>> *Sent:* 13-Jun-20 16:04
>>
>> List,
>>
>> In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It" (
>> https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb), Frank Bruni reflects on something I've
>> been informally discussing with friends and colleagues now for years;
>> namely, that "A society without a grounding in ethics, self-reflection,
>> empathy and beauty is one that has lost its way” (Brian Rosenberg, recently 
>> president
>> of Macalester College). It seems to me that this has happened in the United
>> States.
>>
>> It has long seemed to me that America today has largely abandoned what
>> might be called the normative trivium of aesthetics, ethics, and logic --
>> Peirce's three Normative Sciences, *not* the classical trivium (for
>> which see Sister Miriam Joseph
>> 's 2002 book, *The
>> Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric*) that he
>> generalized to serve as the three branches of Logic as Semeiotic.
>>
>> This philosophical trivium points to the possible *application *of
>> Peirce's three Normative Sciences -- not their theoretical forms, but
>> rather their ordinary and potentially pragmatic guises as they appear in
>> life practice, including reflection and action upon what is beautiful in
>> art and nature, what is ethical in our behavior in the world, and how we
>> can apply 'critical commonsenseism' in our quotidian lives. Bruni writes: "We
>> need writers, philosophers, historians. They’ll be the ones to chart the
>> social, cultural and political challenges of this pandemic -- and of all
>> the other dynamics that have pushed the United States so harrowingly close
>> to the edge. In terms of restoring faith in the American project and
>> reseeding common ground, they’re beyond essential."
>>
>> Bruni's op-ed reflection came in part in response to a recent article by
>> Rosenberg in *The Chronicle of Higher Education*; see "How Should
>> Colleges Prepare for a Post-Pandemic World" (
>> https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507).
>> Rosenberg writes: “If one were to invent a crisis uniquely and diabolically
>> designed to undermine the foundations of traditional colleges and
>> universities, it might look very much like the current global pandemic.” In
>> a similar vein, Professor 

Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium

[Edwina Taborsky]

 

I personally find the comments by Henry James the elder rather ..I'm
not sure of the word. Not merely naïve but possibly alarming. 

I consider that the agenda to develop a 'perfect society' has always
been a basis for totalitarian subjugation - whether it be the
socialism of fascism or communism; whether it be an isolate cult or
an ideology. 

Such an agenda, in my view, ignores that we are material, finite
entities, and as such in a mode of Secondness, which is a mode of
'brute interaction' - and diversity rather than homogeneity.
Furthermore,  we cannot ignore that there is no such thing as
'perfection' - whatever that means. Instead, I prefer the 'bricolage'
of Karl Popper, his rejection of 'historicism' [vs a theistic
interpretation, ie by recognizing God as the author of the play
performed on the historical stage" [The Open Society and Its Enemies,
p8]. AND the open evolution of both Popper and Peirce, where, with the
reality of both Firstness and Secondness and Thirdness - there is no
such thing as 'perfect'. 

Edwina
 On Fri 03/07/20  1:39 PM , g...@gnusystems.ca sent:
Gary R, list,

I just came across a piece of the reverse side of  Turning Signs
that strikes me as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's
philosophical trivium might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and
critical thinking of the world as it emerges from the coronavirus
pandemic” — and relevant in a way that I don’t think has been
discussed in this thread before. It’s only a 3-to-5 minute read: 
http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 [1] .

Gary f.
From:  Gary Richmond  
 Sent: 13-Jun-20 16:04
List,

 In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It"
(https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb [3]), Frank Bruni reflects on something
I've been informally discussing with friends and colleagues now for
years; namely, that "A society without a grounding in ethics,
self-reflection, empathy and beauty is one that has lost its way”
(Brian Rosenberg, recently  president of Macalester College). It
seems to me that this has happened in the United States.

It has long seemed to me that America today has largely abandoned
what might be called the normative trivium of aesthetics, ethics, and
logic -- Peirce's three Normative Sciences,  not the classical trivium
(for which see Sister Miriam Joseph's 2002 book, The Trivium: The
Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric) that he generalized to
serve as the three branches of Logic as Semeiotic. 

This philosophical trivium points to the possible application of
Peirce's three Normative Sciences -- not their theoretical forms, but
rather their ordinary and potentially pragmatic guises as they appear
in life practice, including reflection and action upon what is
beautiful in art and nature, what is ethical in our behavior in the
world, and how we can apply 'critical commonsenseism' in our
quotidian lives. Bruni writes: " We need writers, philosophers,
historians. They’ll be the ones to chart the social, cultural and
political challenges of this pandemic -- and of all the other
dynamics that have pushed the United States so harrowingly close to
the edge. In terms of restoring faith in the American project and
reseeding common ground, they’re beyond essential. "

Bruni's op-ed reflection came in part in response to a recent
article by Rosenberg in The Chronicle of Higher Education ; see "How
Should Colleges Prepare for a Post-Pandemic World"
(https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507
[4]). Rosenberg writes: “If one were to invent a crisis uniquely and
diabolically designed to undermine the foundations of traditional
colleges and universities, it might look very much like the current
global pandemic.” In a similar vein, Professor Andrew Belbanco,
president of the Teagle Foundation which gives as its purpose
promoting the liberal arts, writes:  “This is not only a public
health crisis and an economic crisis, though Lord knows it’s both
of those. It’s also a values crisis. It raises all kinds of deep
human questions: What are our responsibilities to other people? Does
representative democracy work? How do we get to a place where
something like bipartisanship could emerge again?” 

Commenting on the economic divide of the American university, Bruni
notes that "the already pronounced divide between richly endowed,
largely residential schools and more socioeconomically diverse ones
that depend on public funding grows wider as state and local
governments face unprecedented financial distress. A shrinking
minority of students get a boutique college experience. Then
there’s everybody else."  Gail Mellow, former president of
LaGuardia College of the City University of New York (where I taught
for decades before my retirement) is quoted as saying, “We always
knew that America was moving more and more toward very different
groups of people," to which Bruni adds, "that 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium

[Gary Richmond]

Gary F,

Thanks for this which I found quite interesting--and it was possible to
read it in 3 minutes!

I am working on a short message to post in this thread to include a
consideration of Suzanne Langer's work in aesthetics and philosophy of
mind, and which may have some bearing on the question. I'll try to discuss
the material you pointed to in the course of completing that, or,
alternatively, reflect on it in a separate email.

For now I'll only say that the quotation by James the Elder at the top of
the linked material is without question my favorite (although, admittedly,
I haven't read a great deal of Henry James, Sr. whom I only read because
Peirce had recommended doing so. For the most part his theology, his
Swedenborgianism, didn't resonate with me.

Best,

Gary R

"Time is not a renewable resource." gnox

*Gary Richmond*
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*Communication Studies*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*








Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 1:39 PM  wrote:

> Gary R, list,
>
> I just came across a piece of the reverse side of *Turning Signs* that
> strikes me as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's philosophical
> trivium might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of
> the world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic” — and relevant in a
> way that I don’t think has been discussed in this thread before. It’s only
> a 3-to-5 minute read: http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 .
>
> Gary f.
>
>
>
> *From:* Gary Richmond 
> *Sent:* 13-Jun-20 16:04
>
> List,
>
> In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It" (
> https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb), Frank Bruni reflects on something I've
> been informally discussing with friends and colleagues now for years;
> namely, that "A society without a grounding in ethics, self-reflection,
> empathy and beauty is one that has lost its way” (Brian Rosenberg, recently 
> president
> of Macalester College). It seems to me that this has happened in the United
> States.
>
> It has long seemed to me that America today has largely abandoned what
> might be called the normative trivium of aesthetics, ethics, and logic --
> Peirce's three Normative Sciences, *not* the classical trivium (for which
> see Sister Miriam Joseph
> 's 2002 book, *The
> Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric*) that he
> generalized to serve as the three branches of Logic as Semeiotic.
>
> This philosophical trivium points to the possible *application *of
> Peirce's three Normative Sciences -- not their theoretical forms, but
> rather their ordinary and potentially pragmatic guises as they appear in
> life practice, including reflection and action upon what is beautiful in
> art and nature, what is ethical in our behavior in the world, and how we
> can apply 'critical commonsenseism' in our quotidian lives. Bruni writes: "We
> need writers, philosophers, historians. They’ll be the ones to chart the
> social, cultural and political challenges of this pandemic -- and of all
> the other dynamics that have pushed the United States so harrowingly close
> to the edge. In terms of restoring faith in the American project and
> reseeding common ground, they’re beyond essential."
>
> Bruni's op-ed reflection came in part in response to a recent article by
> Rosenberg in *The Chronicle of Higher Education*; see "How Should
> Colleges Prepare for a Post-Pandemic World" (
> https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507).
> Rosenberg writes: “If one were to invent a crisis uniquely and diabolically
> designed to undermine the foundations of traditional colleges and
> universities, it might look very much like the current global pandemic.” In
> a similar vein, Professor Andrew Belbanco, president of the Teagle
> Foundation which gives as its purpose promoting the liberal arts, writes: 
> “This
> is not only a public health crisis and an economic crisis, though Lord
> knows it’s both of those. It’s also a values crisis. It raises all kinds
> of deep human questions: What are our responsibilities to other people?
> Does representative democracy work? How do we get to a place where
> something like bipartisanship could emerge again?”
>
> Commenting on the economic divide of the American university, Bruni notes
> that "the already pronounced divide between richly endowed, largely
> residential schools and more socioeconomically diverse ones that depend on
> public funding grows wider as state and local governments face
> unprecedented financial distress. A shrinking minority of students get a
> boutique college experience. Then there’s everybody else."  Gail Mellow,
> former president of 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium

[Jerry Rhee]

Gary F, list,

I, like everyone else on this list I'm sure, am curious as to learn more
about what you mean by this.
Please elaborate, for we all stand in need of a clear explanation for why
it is that a thing as exalted as Peirce's Trivium is merely being
neglected, don't you agree?

So please, tell us, "Why then had it not been put to its serious use?"

With best wishes,
Jerry R

On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 12:39 PM  wrote:

> Gary R, list,
>
> I just came across a piece of the reverse side of *Turning Signs* that
> strikes me as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's philosophical
> trivium might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of
> the world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic” — and relevant in a
> way that I don’t think has been discussed in this thread before. It’s only
> a 3-to-5 minute read: http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 .
>
> Gary f.
>
>
>
> *From:* Gary Richmond 
> *Sent:* 13-Jun-20 16:04
>
> List,
>
> In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It" (
> https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb), Frank Bruni reflects on something I've
> been informally discussing with friends and colleagues now for years;
> namely, that "A society without a grounding in ethics, self-reflection,
> empathy and beauty is one that has lost its way” (Brian Rosenberg, recently 
> president
> of Macalester College). It seems to me that this has happened in the United
> States.
>
> It has long seemed to me that America today has largely abandoned what
> might be called the normative trivium of aesthetics, ethics, and logic --
> Peirce's three Normative Sciences, *not* the classical trivium (for which
> see Sister Miriam Joseph
> 's 2002 book, *The
> Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric*) that he
> generalized to serve as the three branches of Logic as Semeiotic.
>
> This philosophical trivium points to the possible *application *of
> Peirce's three Normative Sciences -- not their theoretical forms, but
> rather their ordinary and potentially pragmatic guises as they appear in
> life practice, including reflection and action upon what is beautiful in
> art and nature, what is ethical in our behavior in the world, and how we
> can apply 'critical commonsenseism' in our quotidian lives. Bruni writes: "We
> need writers, philosophers, historians. They’ll be the ones to chart the
> social, cultural and political challenges of this pandemic -- and of all
> the other dynamics that have pushed the United States so harrowingly close
> to the edge. In terms of restoring faith in the American project and
> reseeding common ground, they’re beyond essential."
>
> Bruni's op-ed reflection came in part in response to a recent article by
> Rosenberg in *The Chronicle of Higher Education*; see "How Should
> Colleges Prepare for a Post-Pandemic World" (
> https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507).
> Rosenberg writes: “If one were to invent a crisis uniquely and diabolically
> designed to undermine the foundations of traditional colleges and
> universities, it might look very much like the current global pandemic.” In
> a similar vein, Professor Andrew Belbanco, president of the Teagle
> Foundation which gives as its purpose promoting the liberal arts, writes: 
> “This
> is not only a public health crisis and an economic crisis, though Lord
> knows it’s both of those. It’s also a values crisis. It raises all kinds
> of deep human questions: What are our responsibilities to other people?
> Does representative democracy work? How do we get to a place where
> something like bipartisanship could emerge again?”
>
> Commenting on the economic divide of the American university, Bruni notes
> that "the already pronounced divide between richly endowed, largely
> residential schools and more socioeconomically diverse ones that depend on
> public funding grows wider as state and local governments face
> unprecedented financial distress. A shrinking minority of students get a
> boutique college experience. Then there’s everybody else."  Gail Mellow,
> former president of LaGuardia College of the City University of New York
> (where I taught for decades before my retirement) is quoted as saying, “We
> always knew that America was moving more and more toward very different
> groups of people," to which Bruni adds, "that movement is only
> accelerating."
>
> Confronting all this will undoubtedly be one of the great challenges that
> America -- and for that matter, the world -- will have in the years and
> decades to come. The question I pose is: Can Peirce's version of pragmatism
> (or pragmaticism) -- which he also calls 'critical commonsenseism' --
> creatively contribute to these enormous challenges? And, if so, how? And
> are there ways in which Peirce's philosophical trivium might help inform
> the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of the world as it emerges
> from the coronavirus pandemic? If 

RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Pragmatic Trivium

[gnox]

Gary R, list,

I just came across a piece of the reverse side of Turning Signs that strikes me 
as relevant to the “ways in which Peirce's philosophical trivium might help 
inform the aesthetics, ethics, and critical thinking of the world as it emerges 
from the coronavirus pandemic” — and relevant in a way that I don’t think has 
been discussed in this thread before. It’s only a 3-to-5 minute read: 
http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/snc.htm#x14 .

Gary f.

 

From: Gary Richmond mailto:gary.richm...@gmail.com> > 
Sent: 13-Jun-20 16:04



List,

In a recent op-ed piece titled "The End of College as We Knew It" 
(https://tinyurl.com/ybha8mhb), Frank Bruni reflects on something I've been 
informally discussing with friends and colleagues now for years; namely, that 
"A society without a grounding in ethics, self-reflection, empathy and beauty 
is one that has lost its way” (Brian Rosenberg, recently president of 
Macalester College). It seems to me that this has happened in the United States.

It has long seemed to me that America today has largely abandoned what might be 
called the normative trivium of aesthetics, ethics, and logic -- Peirce's three 
Normative Sciences, not the classical trivium (for which see  
 Sister Miriam Joseph's 
2002 book, The Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric) that 
he generalized to serve as the three branches of Logic as Semeiotic.

This philosophical trivium points to the possible application of Peirce's three 
Normative Sciences -- not their theoretical forms, but rather their ordinary 
and potentially pragmatic guises as they appear in life practice, including 
reflection and action upon what is beautiful in art and nature, what is ethical 
in our behavior in the world, and how we can apply 'critical commonsenseism' in 
our quotidian lives. Bruni writes: "We need writers, philosophers, historians. 
They’ll be the ones to chart the social, cultural and political challenges of 
this pandemic -- and of all the other dynamics that have pushed the United 
States so harrowingly close to the edge. In terms of restoring faith in the 
American project and reseeding common ground, they’re beyond essential."

Bruni's op-ed reflection came in part in response to a recent article by 
Rosenberg in The Chronicle of Higher Education; see "How Should Colleges 
Prepare for a Post-Pandemic World" 
(https://www.chronicle.com/article/How-Should-Colleges-Prepare/248507). 
Rosenberg writes: “If one were to invent a crisis uniquely and diabolically 
designed to undermine the foundations of traditional colleges and universities, 
it might look very much like the current global pandemic.” In a similar vein, 
Professor Andrew Belbanco, president of the Teagle Foundation which gives as 
its purpose promoting the liberal arts, writes: “This is not only a public 
health crisis and an economic crisis, though Lord knows it’s both of those. 
It’s also a values crisis. It raises all kinds of deep human questions: What 
are our responsibilities to other people? Does representative democracy work? 
How do we get to a place where something like bipartisanship could emerge 
again?”

Commenting on the economic divide of the American university, Bruni notes that 
"the already pronounced divide between richly endowed, largely residential 
schools and more socioeconomically diverse ones that depend on public funding 
grows wider as state and local governments face unprecedented financial 
distress. A shrinking minority of students get a boutique college experience. 
Then there’s everybody else."  Gail Mellow, former president of LaGuardia 
College of the City University of New York (where I taught for decades before 
my retirement) is quoted as saying, “We always knew that America was moving 
more and more toward very different groups of people," to which Bruni adds, 
"that movement is only accelerating."

Confronting all this will undoubtedly be one of the great challenges that 
America -- and for that matter, the world -- will have in the years and decades 
to come. The question I pose is: Can Peirce's version of pragmatism (or 
pragmaticism) -- which he also calls 'critical commonsenseism' -- creatively 
contribute to these enormous challenges? And, if so, how? And are there ways in 
which Peirce's philosophical trivium might help inform the aesthetics, ethics, 
and critical thinking of the world as it emerges from the coronavirus pandemic? 
If so, how?

 

[Note: I have Bcc'd this post to several former members of this forum, a few 
members who rarely if ever post but who have stayed in contact with me offlist, 
and a few friends and colleagues who have not been members but who may have an 
interest in this topic. Those who are not current members of the forum may send 
your thoughts on the topic off-list to me letting me know if I have your 
permission to post them.]

Best,

Gary

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply 

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Sign Relations

[Jon Awbrey]

Cf: Sign Relations • Semiotic Equivalence Relations 2
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/07/03/sign-relations-%e2%80%a2-semiotic-equivalence-relations-2/

A few items of notation are useful in discussing equivalence relations in general and semiotic equivalence relations in 
particular.  (NB. The notations will be much more readable on the blog page linked above.)


In general, if E is an equivalence relation on a set X then every element x of X belongs to a unique equivalence class 
under E called “the equivalence class of x under E”.  Convention provides the “square bracket notation” for denoting 
such equivalence classes, in either the form [x]_E or the simpler form [x] when the subscript E is understood.  A 
statement that the elements x and y are equivalent under E is called an “equation” or an “equivalence” and may be 
expressed in any of the following ways.


• (x, y) ∈ E

• x ∈ [y]_E

• y ∈ [x]_E

• [x]_E = [y]_E

• x =_E y

Thus we have the following definitions.

• [x]_E = {y ∈ X : (x, y) ∈ E}

• x =_E y ⇔ (x, y) ∈ E

In the application to sign relations it is useful to extend the square bracket notation in the following ways.  If L is 
a sign relation whose connotative component L_SI is an equivalence relation on S = I, let [s]_L be the equivalence class 
of s under L_SI.  That is, let [s]_L = [s]_{L_SI}.  A statement that the signs x and y belong to the same equivalence 
class under a semiotic equivalence relation L_{SI} is called a “semiotic equation” (SEQ) and may be written in either of 
the following forms.


• [x]_L = [y]_L

• x =_L y

In many situations there is one further adaptation of the square bracket notation for semiotic equivalence classes that 
can be useful.  Namely, when there is known to exist a particular triple (o, s, i) in a sign relation L, it is 
permissible to let [o]_L be defined as [s]_L.  These modifications are designed to make the notation for semiotic 
equivalence classes harmonize as well as possible with the frequent use of similar devices for the denotations of signs 
and expressions.


Applying the array of equivalence notations to the sign relations for A and B will serve to illustrate their use and 
utility.


Tables 6a and 6b.  Connotative Components Con(L_A) and Con(L_B)
https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/connotative-components-con-la-con-lb.png

The semiotic equivalence relation for interpreter A yields the following 
semiotic equations.

• [“A”]_{L_A} = [“i”]_{L_A}

• [“B”]_{L_A} = [“u”]_{L_A}

or

• “A” =_{L_A} “i”

• “B” =_{L_A} “u”

Thus it induces the semiotic partition:

• {{“A”, “i”}, {“B”, “u”}}

The semiotic equivalence relation for interpreter B yields the following 
semiotic equations.

• [“A”]_{L_B} = [“u”]_{L_B}

• [“B”]_{L_B} = [“i”]_{L_B}

or

• “A” =_{L_B} “u”

• “B” =_{L_B} “i”

Thus it induces the semiotic partition:

• {{“A”, “u”}, {“B”, “i”}}

Tables 7a and 7b.  Semiotic Partitions for Interpreters A and B
https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/semiotic-partitions-for-interpreters-a-b.png

Regards,

Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . 
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu 
with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of 
the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] diagrams of semiosis

[robert marty]

Jon Alan, List

After a private reply from Jon Alan and to my great regret, I find that it
is in my own interest to stop debating with him on this thread. This is not
a personal matter. I will soon propose a general reflection on the biases I
have identified that prevent a serene scientific debate.

Best regards

Robert

Le mer. 1 juil. 2020 à 09:53, robert marty  a
écrit :

> REP EN  > 01/07
>
>
>
> · No it's not entirely clear:  Do I understand that you keep your
> diagram simply by removing the ovals? If so it's up to you to do it... for
> I remind you that you have contrasted your diagram with the one I offers in
> an introductory book to semiotics:
>
> My original message here:
>
> https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2020-06/msg00154.html
>
> Your alternative proposal here:
>
> https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2020-06/msg00157.html
>
> My two animated diagrams can be found here:
>
>
> http://qualisignes.fr/2020/06/23/what-are-the-characteristics-of-the-peircean-sign/
>
>
>
> *This justifies me asking you a new question: are you still opposing an
> alternative** to* *my diagram and if so?  *
>
>
>
> · In the meantime I will discuss your sentence:
>
>
>
>
>
> *"Where it gets interesting (and perhaps contentious) is identifying the
> different senses of "determining" and the different pairs of correlates to
> which each of them pertains" *You already had in a previous message
> written this:
>
>
>
> *"This reflects once again our disagreement about the meaning of
> "determines" within the process of semeiosis.  In my view, it only means
> "efficiently causes" when a dynamical object determines an indexical sign
> and when a sign token determines a dynamical interpretant (actuality).  It
> means "formally causes" when a dynamical object determines an iconic sign
> and when a sign type determines an immediate interpretant (possibility).
> It means "finally causes" when a dynamical object determines a symbolic
> sign and when a final interpretant (conditional necessity) determines a
> dynamical interpretant.  A sign that never actually determines a dynamical
> interpretant can still be real and have a final interpretant because
> it would produce that effect under ideal circumstances, just as a diamond
> that never actually gets rubbed with corundum nevertheless is really hard
> because it would resist scratching under those circumstances (CP 5.457, EP
> 2:356-357, 1905)".*
>
>
>
> We'll see that it's actually  *"contentious"*  and even more. On the face
> of it, one may wonder who would have the legitimacy to create three
> additional meanings for a term of its language. Dictionaries record social
> language practices, not individual proposals. We can certainly create
> different meanings, but we must define them unambiguously correctly and
> above all create a new term for any new meaning (CP 2.226).
>
> Beforehand I recall this quotation which unambiguously fixes the meaning
> of "determines":
>
>
>
> * We thus learn that the Object determines (i.e. renders definitely to be
> such as it will be,) the Sign in a particular manner.(CP 8.361) (souligné
> par moi)*
>
>
>
> In linguistics , determinatum (from
> the Latin  determinare, to fix the
> limits of something) is a part of speech
>  that is modified by
> another part of speech.
>
>
> So we have:
>
>  "determinans determines determinatum" or  "determinans modificate
> determinatum", which seems to me very close to Peirce's conception which
> adds to the common sense a kind of injunction about the very being of the
> determinatum. It is clear that it is not the couple (determinans,
> determinatum) that can define the meaning of the relationship that binds
> them, otherwise one could create as many relationships as couples that one
> would be able to define. In your opinion, there should be a distinction:
>
> · An efficient cause "determinesA" a reality
>
> · A formal cause "determinesB" a possibility
>
> · A final cause "determinesC" a necessity
>
> Why not others?
>
> This three-way distinction for "determines" should therefore disappear
> from your point. In fact, it seems to me that it is of no use.
>
>
>
> *So my second question is: **you take it off?*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Le mar. 30 juin 2020 à 03:00, Jon Alan Schmidt 
> a écrit :
>
>> Robert, List:
>>
>> I acknowledge that my diagram looks very much like a Venn diagram, and I
>> confess that this is misleading.  It is not intended to be understood that
>> way, so my error was creating that wrong impression, for which I apologize.
>>
>> A quasi-mind is not a *set*, it "is itself a sign, a determinable sign"
>> (SS 195, 1906).  I am trying to illustrate the idea that the commens is the 
>> *overlap
>> *of the uttering and interpreting quasi-minds due to their being "fused"
>> or "welded" in a particular sign (cf. EP