RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[gnox]

I wonder whether Peirce was being ironic when he wrote in R 645 of Phaneroscopy 
being “still in the condition of a science-egg, hardly any details of it being 
as yet distinguishable, though enough to assure the student of it that, under 
the fostering care that it is sure to enjoy, if the human culture continues 
long, it surely will in the future become a strong and beneficient science.”

In the light of what’s been said about it by its vociferous opponents on 
peirce-l, the part about “fostering care” sounds ironic to the point of 
sarcasm. But then again, the long continuation of “human culture” is, in our 
time, a bigger IF than ever. When we see the overwhelming ecological facts 
being ignored by the Powers that Be, it seems extremely unlikely that the 
“beneficient” potential of any science like Phaneroscopy will ever be developed.

Well, if you want to make an Anthropocene, you gotta break some science-eggs.

Gary f.

 

From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu  On 
Behalf Of Gary Richmond
Sent: 3-Sep-21 13:27
To: Peirce-L 
Cc: Jon Awbrey 
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

 

JA: "not everything under construction is a science."

 

True. But I'd suggest that there is no good reason to block the way of inquiry 
of those who think that phaneroscopy, for example, may prove to be a science 
even if, at present, it remains in my view but a science egg. That it is not 
yet clear whether it can be fully developed as a science (I believe that there 
is good to think that it can) is, for me at least, one of the reasons why we're 
having this slow read.

 

So, those who think phaneroscopy (involving the doctrine of categories) is 
worth looking further into include not only Andre De Tienne, but to cite again 
a recent book on the topic, Richard Kenneth Atkins', 2018 monograph, Charles S. 
Peirce's Phenomenology: Analysis and Consciousness 

https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190887179.001.0001/oso-9780190887179

 

 GR

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[Jon Awbrey]

Dear Gary,

You know me well enough to know I have nothing against neologisms —
I used to coin 5 or 6 every morning before breakfast … but I'm much
better now — and don't get me wrong, I fully sympathize with Peirce's
desire to distinguish his take on phenomenology from Hegel's mistakes.
And I'm totally copacetic with using the word “inquiry” to describe any
activity aimed at fixing belief, at least, in broad brush among friends.
But it's one toke over the line if we call any form of inquiry a science,
for then we'd have Tenacioscopy, Authorioscopy, Apriorioscopy to counter
on a recurring basis, not that we don't already have to deal with them
under hosts and legions of the usual suspect old-fangled paleologisms.

So it's gotta stop somewhere — and for that we have to acknowledge
critical criteria in our critique of what makes inquiry scientific.

I see I'm one neologism short of my old quota —
but I'll save oöscience for next time …

Regards,

Jon

On 9/3/2021 1:26 PM, Gary Richmond wrote:

JA: "not everything under construction is a science."

True. But I'd suggest that there is no good reason to block the way of
inquiry of those who think that phaneroscopy, for example, *may* prove to
be a science even if, at present, it remains in my view but a science egg.
That it is not yet clear whether it can be fully developed as a science (I
believe that there is good to think that it can) is, for me at least, one
of the reasons why we're having this slow read.

So, those who think phaneroscopy (involving the doctrine of categories) is
worth looking further into include not only Andre De Tienne, but to cite
again a recent book on the topic, Richard Kenneth Atkins', 2018
monograph, *Charles S. Peirce's Phenomenology: Analysis and Consciousness *
https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190887179.001.0001/oso-9780190887179

  GR

“Let everything happen to you
Beauty and terror
Just keep going
No feeling is final”
― Rainer Maria Rilke

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


On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:06 PM Jon Awbrey  wrote:


Well, it's true, all science is under construction.
But not everything under construction is a science.

Jon

On 9/3/2021 12:37 PM, Gary Richmond wrote:

JA: " the science unsigned is not a true science."

Rather, the science undeveloped is not a true science.

GR

“Let everything happen to you
Beauty and terror
Just keep going
No feeling is final”
― Rainer Maria Rilke

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


On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 12:00 PM Jon Awbrey  wrote:



Yes, yes, the tao that is signed is not the true tao ...
I have the fondest nostalgia for my Be Here Now days
when we all cleansed the Doors Of Our Perceptions at
every available opportunity and strove to attain the
Purity Of Thoughtlessness.  And yes, a bit or prebit
of meditation now and again makes for a healthy mind.
But been there then, did that when, and I know where
it ends — the science unsigned is not a true science.

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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[Edwina Taborsky]

 

 BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}List

I heartily agree. Sometimes Peirce's terms are 'a bit much'.

I prefer 'data' or 'input data' to 'prebit'. My agenda is to EXPAND
the use of the Peircean analytic infrastructure beyond his pages and
beyond the elites happily immersed in his works - and see how that
infrastructure can explain the 'Real World'. To do that, we have to
use common terms.

Edwina
 On Fri 03/09/21 12:31 PM , "sowa @bestweb.net" s...@bestweb.net
sent:
 Jon A,   I  detect a prebit of irony in your note.   Although I
respect Peirce's ethics of terminology and observe his
recommendations when they are appropriate and realistic,I also know
that most of them have died on the vine of common sense.   If Peirce
had owned an automobile, he would have called it an autokineto. 
Greece is the only country in the world that uses the word
'autokineto'.   John. 
-
 From: "Jon Awbrey" 
 Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 12:01 PM
 To: g...@gnusystems.ca, peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
 Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39   
 Yes, yes, the tao that is signed is not the true tao ...
 I have the fondest nostalgia for my Be Here Now days
 when we all cleansed the Doors Of Our Perceptions at
 every available opportunity and strove to attain the
 Purity Of Thoughtlessness. And yes, a bit or prebit
 of meditation now and again makes for a healthy mind.
 But been there then, did that when, and I know where
 it ends — the science unsigned is not a true science.
 Regards,
 Jon
 On 9/3/2021 10:11 AM, g...@gnusystems.ca wrote:
 > Continuing our slow read on phaneroscopy, here is the next slide
of André De Tienne’s slideshow posted on the Peirce Edition
Project (iupui.edu)  site. It is mostly a gloss on the term Prebit
introduced by Peirce late in 1909 (previous slide).
 >
 > Gary f.
 >
 >
 > Text:
 >
 > • Prebit comes from praebitum < praebere in Latin, which is a
contraction of praehabere (and of course habere gives habitum, whence
“habit”).
 >
 > • Praebere means to give, grant, fumish, supply; to occasion,
exhibit. A praebitum or prebit is something like the datum, a term
Peirce mentioned but did not want to use because it was already too
loaded with undesired meanings.
 >
 > • He thought prebit was superior to phaneron (in the particular
sense) because he came to realize that there were certain elements of
experience that could not be said to be manifest in any legitimate way
(such as certain mathematical entities) even though they were part and
parcel of what experience supplied.
 >
 > • Once could also reason that prebit is a pre-habitum: the datum
one has not become used to yet, before it has turned into, or been
submitted to, a filtering habit.
 >
 > IMPORTANTLY: The Prebit is NOT A SIGN!
 >
 > The Phaneron is NOT A SIGN!
 >
 > Yet, … Signs are phaneral!
 >
 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
 ? 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of
the message and nothing in the body. More at
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
 ? PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond;
and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[Gary Richmond]

JA: "not everything under construction is a science."

True. But I'd suggest that there is no good reason to block the way of
inquiry of those who think that phaneroscopy, for example, *may* prove to
be a science even if, at present, it remains in my view but a science egg.
That it is not yet clear whether it can be fully developed as a science (I
believe that there is good to think that it can) is, for me at least, one
of the reasons why we're having this slow read.

So, those who think phaneroscopy (involving the doctrine of categories) is
worth looking further into include not only Andre De Tienne, but to cite
again a recent book on the topic, Richard Kenneth Atkins', 2018
monograph, *Charles
S. Peirce's Phenomenology: Analysis and Consciousness *
https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190887179.001.0001/oso-9780190887179

 GR



GR

“Let everything happen to you
Beauty and terror
Just keep going
No feeling is final”
― Rainer Maria Rilke

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







On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:06 PM Jon Awbrey  wrote:

> Well, it's true, all science is under construction.
> But not everything under construction is a science.
>
> Jon
>
> On 9/3/2021 12:37 PM, Gary Richmond wrote:
> > JA: " the science unsigned is not a true science."
> >
> > Rather, the science undeveloped is not a true science.
> >
> > GR
> >
> > “Let everything happen to you
> > Beauty and terror
> > Just keep going
> > No feeling is final”
> > ― Rainer Maria Rilke
> >
> > *Gary Richmond*
> > *Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
> > *Communication Studies*
> > *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 12:00 PM Jon Awbrey  wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Yes, yes, the tao that is signed is not the true tao ...
> >> I have the fondest nostalgia for my Be Here Now days
> >> when we all cleansed the Doors Of Our Perceptions at
> >> every available opportunity and strove to attain the
> >> Purity Of Thoughtlessness.  And yes, a bit or prebit
> >> of meditation now and again makes for a healthy mind.
> >> But been there then, did that when, and I know where
> >> it ends — the science unsigned is not a true science.
> >>
> >> 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[Jon Awbrey]

Well, it's true, all science is under construction.
But not everything under construction is a science.

Jon

On 9/3/2021 12:37 PM, Gary Richmond wrote:

JA: " the science unsigned is not a true science."

Rather, the science undeveloped is not a true science.

GR

“Let everything happen to you
Beauty and terror
Just keep going
No feeling is final”
― Rainer Maria Rilke

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


On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 12:00 PM Jon Awbrey  wrote:



Yes, yes, the tao that is signed is not the true tao ...
I have the fondest nostalgia for my Be Here Now days
when we all cleansed the Doors Of Our Perceptions at
every available opportunity and strove to attain the
Purity Of Thoughtlessness.  And yes, a bit or prebit
of meditation now and again makes for a healthy mind.
But been there then, did that when, and I know where
it ends — the science unsigned is not a true science.

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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Phaneroscopy as a science

[Jon Alan Schmidt]

John, List:

JFS: But people who never heard the word may occasionally stop to think
about what they see, how they see it, and why they interpreted it as they
did.  Those thoughts are the beginning of phenomenology.


Perhaps, but it is important to recognize that *Peirce's *phenomenology
(hereinafter phaneroscopy) is not at all limited to *seeing *or even
*perceiving*. As quotation #1 explicitly states, it encompasses not only
"something that outward experience forces upon our attention," but also
"the wildest of dreams" and "the most abstract and general of the
conclusions of science." In other words, it observes not only the outer
world of existence, but also the inner world of imagination and the logical
world of mathematics (CP 8.299, 1904). Moreover, as quotation #1 also
explicitly states, phaneroscopy is concerned *only *with the phaneron "as
it presents itself, unreplaced by any interpretation." In other words, "why
they *interpreted *it as they did" is *not *a question that it attempts to
answer.

JFS: But all those patterns or "hypostatizations of relations" can be
represented as diagrams ...


I agree, but again, diagrammatic reasoning is always an *application of
mathematics* within phaneroscopy or any of the other positive sciences (
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2021-08/msg00415.html).

JFS: ... and they must be evaluated by the normative sciences. especially
methodeutic.


This is certainly true in metaphysics and the special sciences, but not in
phaneroscopy. As Gary F. quoted from Peirce yesterday, "Logic must be
founded on the results of Phaneroscopy, so that the *Phaneroscopist has no
right to appeal to the science of logic*" (R 645, 1909). The only logic
employed *within the practice of phaneroscopy* is mathematical/formal
logic, which is diagrammatic reasoning, which is strictly deductive.

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 10:53 AM sowa @bestweb.net  wrote:

> Phenomenology or phaneroscopy is a science.  In their daily lives, people
> rarely practice phenomenology.  But people who never heard the word may
> occasionally stop to think about what they see, how they see it, and why
> they interpreted it as they did.  Those thoughts are the beginning of
> phenomenology.  Artists, scientists, and detectives may dig deeper, but
> only as far as mecessary for their primary interests. In quotation #1
> below, Peirce summarizes the three "faculties which we must endeavor to
> gather" for the practice of phenomenology:
>
> a) "The first and foremost is that rare faculty" of the artist:  "the
> faculty of seeing what stares one in the face, just as it presents itself,
> unreplaced by any interpretation, unsophisticated by any allowance for this
> or for that supposed modifying circumstance."
> b) "we must strive to arm ourselves with is a resolute discrimination
> which fastens itself like a bulldog upon the particular feature that we are
> studying, follows it wherever it may lurk, and detects it beneath all its
> disguises."
>  c) "The third faculty we shall need is the generalizing power of the
> mathematician who produces the abstract formula that comprehends the very
> essence of the feature under examination purified from all admixture of
> extraneous and irrelevant accompaniments." That "abstract formula" produced
> by the mathematician is the diagram. In quotation #2, he says "the geometer
> draws a diagram".  He calls it a hypostatization:  "Intuition is the
> regarding of the abstract in a concrete form, by the realistic
> hypostatization of relations; that is the one sole method of valuable
> thought."
>
> In quotation #3, he says that artists are better observers than scientists
> who limit their attention to "special minutiae".  A detective who is
> looking for clues at a crime scene is searching for even more specialized
> minutiae.  The differences are the result of their goals: an esthetic
> appreciation of patterns in nature, a general law that governs a certain
> kind of pattern, or the discovery of a specific pattern in a specific event.
>
> A phenomenologist requires talents of all three:  discover specific
> patterns in specific events, formulate a hypothesis that explains them, and
> relate the "special minutiae" to a broad vision of the whole.  But all
> those patterns or "hypostatizations of relations" can be represented as
> diagrams, and they must be evaluated by the normative sciences. especially
> methodeutic.
> .
> John
>
> ---
>
> 1. what we have to do, as students of phenomenology, is simply to open our
> mental eyes and look well at the phenomenon and say what are the
> characteristics that are never wanting in it, whether that phenomenon be
> something that outward experience forces upon our attention, or whether it
> be the wildest of dreams, or whether it be the 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[Gary Richmond]

JA: " the science unsigned is not a true science."

Rather, the science undeveloped is not a true science.

GR

“Let everything happen to you
Beauty and terror
Just keep going
No feeling is final”
― Rainer Maria Rilke

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







On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 12:00 PM Jon Awbrey  wrote:

>
> Yes, yes, the tao that is signed is not the true tao ...
> I have the fondest nostalgia for my Be Here Now days
> when we all cleansed the Doors Of Our Perceptions at
> every available opportunity and strove to attain the
> Purity Of Thoughtlessness.  And yes, a bit or prebit
> of meditation now and again makes for a healthy mind.
> But been there then, did that when, and I know where
> it ends — the science unsigned is not a true science.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon
>
> On 9/3/2021 10:11 AM, g...@gnusystems.ca wrote:
> > Continuing our slow read on phaneroscopy, here is the next slide of
> André De Tienne’s slideshow posted on the Peirce Edition Project (
> iupui.edu) 
> site. It is mostly a gloss on the term Prebit introduced by Peirce late in
> 1909 (previous slide).
> >
> > Gary f.
> >
> >
> > Text:
> >
> > •  Prebit comes from praebitum < praebere in Latin, which is a
> contraction of praehabere (and of course habere gives habitum, whence
> “habit”).
> >
> > •  Praebere means to give, grant, fumish, supply; to occasion,
> exhibit. A praebitum or prebit is something like the datum, a term Peirce
> mentioned but did not want to use because it was already too loaded with
> undesired meanings.
> >
> > •  He thought prebit was superior to phaneron (in the particular
> sense) because he came to realize that there were certain elements of
> experience that could not be said to be manifest in any legitimate way
> (such as certain mathematical entities) even though they were part and
> parcel of what experience supplied.
> >
> > •  Once could also reason that prebit is a pre-habitum: the
> datum one has not become used to yet, before it has turned into, or been
> submitted to, a filtering habit.
> >
> > IMPORTANTLY: The Prebit is NOT A SIGN!
> >
> > The Phaneron is NOT A SIGN!
> >
> > Yet, … Signs are phaneral!
> >
>
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> ► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the
> message and nothing in the body.  More at
> https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
> ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and
> co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[sowa @bestweb.net]

Jon A,

 I  detect a prebit of irony in your note.

 Although I respect Peirce's ethics of terminology and observe his
 recommendations when they are appropriate and realistic,I also
 know that most of them have died on the vine of common sense.

 If Peirce had owned an automobile, he would have called it an
 autokineto.  Greece is the only country in the world that uses
 the word 'autokineto'.

 John.


 From: "Jon Awbrey" 
Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 12:01 PM
To: g...@gnusystems.ca, peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

Yes, yes, the tao that is signed is not the true tao ...
I have the fondest nostalgia for my Be Here Now days
when we all cleansed the Doors Of Our Perceptions at
every available opportunity and strove to attain the
Purity Of Thoughtlessness. And yes, a bit or prebit
of meditation now and again makes for a healthy mind.
But been there then, did that when, and I know where
it ends - the science unsigned is not a true science.

Regards,

Jon

On 9/3/2021 10:11 AM, g...@gnusystems.ca wrote:
> Continuing our slow read on phaneroscopy, here is the next slide of André De 
> Tienne's slideshow posted on the Peirce Edition Project (iupui.edu) 
>  site. It is mostly 
> a gloss on the term Prebit introduced by Peirce late in 1909 (previous slide).
>
> Gary f.
>
>
> Text:
>
> . Prebit comes from praebitum < praebere in Latin, which is a contraction of 
> praehabere (and of course habere gives habitum, whence "habit").
>
> . Praebere means to give, grant, fumish, supply; to occasion, exhibit. A 
> praebitum or prebit is something like the datum, a term Peirce mentioned but 
> did not want to use because it was already too loaded with undesired meanings.
>
> . He thought prebit was superior to phaneron (in the particular sense) 
> because he came to realize that there were certain elements of experience 
> that could not be said to be manifest in any legitimate way (such as certain 
> mathematical entities) even though they were part and parcel of what 
> experience supplied.
>
> . Once could also reason that prebit is a pre-habitum: the datum one has not 
> become used to yet, before it has turned into, or been submitted to, a 
> filtering habit.
>
> IMPORTANTLY: The Prebit is NOT A SIGN!
>
> The Phaneron is NOT A SIGN!
>
> Yet, . Signs are phaneral!
>

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
? 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
? PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.


_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read Slide 39

[Jon Awbrey]

Yes, yes, the tao that is signed is not the true tao ...
I have the fondest nostalgia for my Be Here Now days
when we all cleansed the Doors Of Our Perceptions at
every available opportunity and strove to attain the
Purity Of Thoughtlessness.  And yes, a bit or prebit
of meditation now and again makes for a healthy mind.
But been there then, did that when, and I know where
it ends — the science unsigned is not a true science.

Regards,

Jon

On 9/3/2021 10:11 AM, g...@gnusystems.ca wrote:

Continuing our slow read on phaneroscopy, here is the next slide of André De Tienne’s 
slideshow posted on the Peirce Edition Project (iupui.edu) 
  site. It is mostly 
a gloss on the term Prebit introduced by Peirce late in 1909 (previous slide).

Gary f.


Text:

•  Prebit comes from praebitum < praebere in Latin, which is a 
contraction of praehabere (and of course habere gives habitum, whence “habit”).

•  Praebere means to give, grant, fumish, supply; to occasion, exhibit. 
A praebitum or prebit is something like the datum, a term Peirce mentioned but 
did not want to use because it was already too loaded with undesired meanings.

•  He thought prebit was superior to phaneron (in the particular sense) 
because he came to realize that there were certain elements of experience that 
could not be said to be manifest in any legitimate way (such as certain 
mathematical entities) even though they were part and parcel of what experience 
supplied.

•  Once could also reason that prebit is a pre-habitum: the datum one 
has not become used to yet, before it has turned into, or been submitted to, a 
filtering habit.

IMPORTANTLY: The Prebit is NOT A SIGN!

The Phaneron is NOT A SIGN!

Yet, … Signs are phaneral!




_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

[PEIRCE-L] Phaneroscopy as a science

[sowa @bestweb.net]

 Phenomenology or phaneroscopy is a science.  In their daily lives,
people rarely practice phenomenology.  But people who never heard the
word may occasionally stop to think about what they see, how they see it,
and why they interpreted it as they did.  Those thoughts are the
beginning of phenomenology.  Artists, scientists, and detectives may
dig deeper, but only as far as mecessary for their primary interests.
 In quotation #1 below, Peirce summarizes the three "faculties which we
must endeavor to gather" for the practice of phenomenology:
  
 a) "The first and foremost is that rare faculty" of the artist:  "the
faculty of seeing what stares one in the face, just as it presents
itself, unreplaced by any interpretation, unsophisticated by any
allowance for this or for that supposed modifying circumstance."
 b) "we must strive to arm ourselves with is a resolute discrimination
which fastens itself like a bulldog upon the particular feature that we
are studying, follows it wherever it may lurk, and detects it beneath
all its disguises."
  
 c) "The third faculty we shall need is the generalizing power of the
mathematician who produces the abstract formula that comprehends the
very essence of the feature under examination purified from all
admixture of extraneous and irrelevant accompaniments."
 That "abstract formula" produced by the mathematician is the diagram.
In quotation #2, he says "the geometer draws a diagram".  He calls it a
hypostatization:  "Intuition is the regarding of the abstract in a
concrete form, by the realistic hypostatization of relations; that is
the one sole method of valuable thought."
  
 In quotation #3, he says that artists are better observers than
scientists who limit their attention to "special minutiae".  A detective
who is looking for clues at a crime scene is searching for even more
specialized minutiae.  The differences are the result of their goals:
an esthetic appreciation of patterns in nature, a general law that
governs a certain kind of pattern, or the discovery of a specific
pattern in a specific event.
  
 A phenomenologist requires talents of all three:  discover specific
patterns in specific events, formulate a hypothesis that explains them,
and relate the "special minutiae" to a broad vision of the whole.  But
all those patterns or "hypostatizations of relations" can be represented
as diagrams, and theyt must be evaluated by the normative sciences.
especially methodeutic.
 .
 John
  
 ---
  
 1. what we have to do, as students of phenomenology, is simply to open
our mental eyes and look well at the phenomenon and say what are the
characteristics that are never wanting in it, whether that phenomenon be
something that outward experience forces upon our attention, or whether
it be the wildest of dreams, or whether it be the most abstract and
general of the conclusions of science.  The faculties which we must
endeavor to gather for this work are three.  The first and foremost is
that rare faculty, the faculty of seeing what stares one in the face,
just as it presents itself, unreplaced by any interpretation,
unsophisticated by any allowance for this or for that supposed modifying
circumstance.  This is the faculty of the artist who sees for example
the apparent colors of nature as they appear...  The second faculty we
must strive to arm ourselves with is a resolute discrimination which
fastens itself like a bulldog upon the particular feature that we are
studying, follows it wherever it may lurk, and detects it beneath all
its disguises.  The third faculty we shall need is the generalizing
power of the mathematician who produces the abstract formula that
comprehends the very essence of the feature under examination purified
from all admixture of extraneous and irrelevant accompaniments.
(EP 2:147-148, 1903)
  
 2. The work of the poet or novelist is not so utterly different from
that of the scientific man.  The artist introduces a fiction; but it is
not an arbitrary one; it exhibits affinities to which the mind accords a
certain approval in pronouncing them beautiful, which if it is not
exactly the same as saying that the synthesis is true, is something of
the same general kind.  The geometer draws a diagram, which if not
exactly a fiction, is at least a creation, and by means of observation
of that diagram he is able to synthesize and show relations between
elements which before seemed to have no necessary connection.  The
realities compel us to put some things into very close relation and
others less so, in a highly complicated, and in the sense itself
unintelligible manner; but it is the genius of the mind, that takes up
all these hints of sense, adds immensely to them, makes them precise,
and shows them in intelligible form in the intuitions of space and time.
Intuition is the regarding of the abstract in a concrete form, by the
realistic hypostatization of relations; that is the one sole method of
valuable thought.  (W 6:187, EP 1:261-262, 

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 38

[gnox]

Thanks for your comments, Jon!

What I posted yesterday was only the first few pages of R 645. Reading the rest 
of it yesterday, I realized that it reveals quite a lot about the theory and 
practice of Peirce’s phaneroscopy, that it has not been published in the 
standard primary sources, and that I couldn’t find a complete transcription of 
it on the web. So I made one and put it on my website: How to Define 
(gnusystems.ca)  . (“How to Define” is 
Peirce’s title for it, which is interesting in itself.) I highly recommend it 
to those who wish to clarify the concept of phaneroscopy by reading Peirce 
himself rather than peirce-l posts and other secondary sources. It also 
includes some autobiographical asides— perhaps the reason why Ketner included 
most of it in his “Autobiography of Charles Sanders Peirce,” His Glassy 
Essence— which are relevant to his own practice, both of phaneroscopy and 
writing.

Gary f.

 

} Now listed to one aneither and liss them down and smoothen out your leaves of 
rose. [Finnegans Wake 101] {

  https://gnusystems.ca/wp/ }{ living the time

 

From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu  On 
Behalf Of Jon Alan Schmidt
Sent: 2-Sep-21 18:27
To: Peirce-L 
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 38

 

Gary F., List:

 

CSP (bolded below): The importance of distinguishing between the three studies 
is due in the first place to the diversity of their general aims.

 

As I have said before, this is the basic idea underlying Peirce's entire 
classification of the sciences--they are distinguished by their different 
purposes. It is not a matter of how people identify themselves, professionally 
or otherwise, but of what they are seeking to learn by embarking upon a 
particular inquiry. Someone framing pure hypotheses, and then drawing necessary 
conclusions from them, is acting as a mathematician. Someone observing whatever 
is or could be present to the mind in any way, and then analyzing it into its 
irreducible elements, is acting as a phaneroscopist. Someone exploring the 
distinction between truth and falsity, along with the theory of how to attain 
the former and avoid the latter, is acting as a logician. Someone investigating 
the actual workings of embodied minds is acting as a psychologist.

 

CSP (bolded below): Phaneroscopy asks what are the possibilities of 
consciousness.

 

This is precisely why I have deliberately adopted the habit of describing the 
phaneron as whatever is or could be present to the mind in any way. Moreover, 
as Edwina has rightly pointed out, phaneroscopy is not just concerned with our 
individual human minds, but with mind in Peirce's much more general sense. In R 
645 (1909) as quoted at length below, he equates "consciousness" with this 
broader notion of unmediated presence to the mind--immediate consciousness 
rather than self-consciousness or cognitive consciousness, feeling/primisense 
rather than altersense or medisense (CP 7.540-551, c. 1896), 1ns rather than 
2ns or 3ns. From this standpoint, in accordance with Peirce's tychism, even 
individual atoms are "conscious" or "sentient," albeit to a very small degree 
(CP 6.201, 1898).

 

Regards,




Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA

Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian

www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt   
- twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt  

 

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the 
body.  More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.