Hello Brad,
A very interesting theme you have taken on. A challenging one, too.
Apel and Deely come from very different traditions. I guess about all
listers have read Deely (on Peirce), but none to my knowledge has read
Apel (on Peirce). Except me. - I'd like to know if there are some other
seasoned listers with an interest in the views of Apel on CSP.
Early on I took the habit of avoiding any reading of interpretations on
any classic texts before I had got the feel of understanding the classic
in question on its own right. (Invented many kinds of tests to my
correct understanding in the way.)
Now you have taken the job of comparing two eminent writers with a very,
very different background and standpoints. Different traditions of
thought.
If you are seaching for earlier publications comparing Deely's
interpretations and those of Apel, I suspect there is none to find.
How come you got interested in Apel? - I am a European philospher, so of
course I do know Apel, and not only on CSP.
My best,
Kirsti Määttänen
Tampere University, Finland
Brad Venner kirjoitti 15.6.2017 20:19:
Hi, all. My name is Brad Venner - I'm a new list subscriber.
I'd like to put together a paper comparing the approaches of John
Deely and Karl-Otto Apel, in memorium of their recent passing (Deely
in Jan 2017; Apel in May 2017). I'm thinking of focusing on their
history of philosophy projects as a frame. Both credit Peirce as the
originator of a new philosophical age. Apel considers three major
phases of "first philosophy" (ontology, transcendental subject,
transcendental semiotics) while Deely considers four (ancient, latin,
modern, post-modern). Thus Deely splits the ancient age into Greek
and Latin phases. This difference seems related to their overall
emphasis on Peirce's influences - Apel emphasizes the Kantian
influences, while Deely emphasizes the Latin influences. Apel's term
"transcendental semiotics" caries this Kantian/Latin distinction.
I haven't found any such direct comparisons in the literature so far,
which concerns me a little, since it almost certainly reflects my
ignorance of philosophy (I'm a professional statistician). If anyone
has any relevant references that I've missed, or related ideas that
you know of, I'd appreciate if you would post them to the list.
Thanks!
-
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 the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
