Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

2018-06-08 Thread Helmut Raulien 
 
 

Supp-supplement: And, I think, that amongst the things about what is to be said more, is the subject of the difference between classification and composition (inclusion), which Russell had pointed out. The third one, between them (as there are always three- Peircean) is power. 1: Composition, 2.: Power, 3.: Classification. This distinctions are essential in many cases, e.g. to talk about "degenerateness" it is essential to know, that it merely applies to classification (sign classes), but not to composition (like a sign being composed of sign, object, interpretant). That was only my theory: Dont necessarily approve it.



 
 

Supplement: From Wikipedia and other internet articles I have got the strong idea, that Russell (of whom there was only one, he just had got very old) was a good guy. Might have called himself "atheist", but performatively always worked for the general good. So I wonder. Don´t bother to tell just me, if all others already know, I will try to find out myself where and when he was an inquiry-blocker, or an anti-transcendentalist, or a metaphysics-refuter.



Thank you, John, Stephen, and all, especially John, for your patient explanations and answers to my errors. From all I know, which is not much, I of course agree so far. Also, that someone has to clear the brushes. Have there been two Russells? I have read an article about Russell falsely claiming that Peirce did not sufficiently tell classification from inclusion, at the time Peirce still was alive. On the other hand Russell was contemporary with Spencer-Brown, in the nineteensixties. I would suggest Russell´s daughter to take part at the "Me too"- debate, for her being taken advantage of in the process of advertisement of "Laws Of Form". That was not very metaphysical or transcendental (categorical imperative, path is goal, and so on). Anyways, do inquiry blocks follow a certain pattern, like, declaring one aspect of philosophy for the main one, and others for epiphenomena or even irrelevant ones?.
Best, Helmut

 08. Juni 2018 um 16:44 Uhr
 "Stephen Curtiss Rose" 
wrote:


Wittgenstein, Peirce, and Nietzsche fit together and seeing that seems to me almost key to figuring out where we need to go. Of the three Peirce is the heavy lifter, Nietzsche the brush clearer and Wittgenstein the assent CSP needs to say what he does about science, metaphysics, and semiotics.

 








amazon.com/author/stephenrose








 

On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:39 AM,  wrote:

John,

Well put, indeed!

Kirsti M.

John F Sowa kirjoitti 3.6.2018 00:57:
On 6/2/2018 5:33 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
I vaguely recall that [Wittgenstein] said like: "About (this or that)
you must not speak"... I just remember that when I read it, I thought:
"No, you don´t tell me when to shut up".

That was from the his first book, the Tractatus.  He wrote that
while he was still following his mentors, Frege and Russell.

Russell and Carnap loved that book, because they misunderstood
his point.  There is much more to say.

Please read the signproc.pdf article.

John



-
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 .




 


- 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 .




- 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 .









-
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 .

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

2018-06-08 Thread Helmut Raulien 
 
 

Supplement: From Wikipedia and other internet articles I have got the strong idea, that Russell (of whom there was only one, he just had got very old) was a good guy. Might have called himself "atheist", but performatively always worked for the general good. So I wonder. Don´t bother to tell just me, if all others already know, I will try to find out myself where and when he was an inquiry-blocker, or an anti-transcendentalist, or a metaphysics-refuter.



Thank you, John, Stephen, and all, especially John, for your patient explanations and answers to my errors. From all I know, which is not much, I of course agree so far. Also, that someone has to clear the brushes. Have there been two Russells? I have read an article about Russell falsely claiming that Peirce did not sufficiently tell classification from inclusion, at the time Peirce still was alive. On the other hand Russell was contemporary with Spencer-Brown, in the nineteensixties. I would suggest Russell´s daughter to take part at the "Me too"- debate, for her being taken advantage of in the process of advertisement of "Laws Of Form". That was not very metaphysical or transcendental (categorical imperative, path is goal, and so on). Anyways, do inquiry blocks follow a certain pattern, like, declaring one aspect of philosophy for the main one, and others for epiphenomena or even irrelevant ones?.
Best, Helmut

 08. Juni 2018 um 16:44 Uhr
 "Stephen Curtiss Rose" 
wrote:


Wittgenstein, Peirce, and Nietzsche fit together and seeing that seems to me almost key to figuring out where we need to go. Of the three Peirce is the heavy lifter, Nietzsche the brush clearer and Wittgenstein the assent CSP needs to say what he does about science, metaphysics, and semiotics.

 








amazon.com/author/stephenrose








 

On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:39 AM,  wrote:

John,

Well put, indeed!

Kirsti M.

John F Sowa kirjoitti 3.6.2018 00:57:
On 6/2/2018 5:33 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
I vaguely recall that [Wittgenstein] said like: "About (this or that)
you must not speak"... I just remember that when I read it, I thought:
"No, you don´t tell me when to shut up".

That was from the his first book, the Tractatus.  He wrote that
while he was still following his mentors, Frege and Russell.

Russell and Carnap loved that book, because they misunderstood
his point.  There is much more to say.

Please read the signproc.pdf article.

John



-
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 .




 


- 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 .




- 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 .




-
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 .

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

2018-06-08 Thread Helmut Raulien 
Thank you, John, Stephen, and all, especially John, for your patient explanations and answers to my errors. From all I know, which is not much, I of course agree so far. Also, that someone has to clear the brushes. Have there been two Russells? I have read an article about Russell falsely claiming that Peirce did not sufficiently tell classification from inclusion, at the time Peirce still was alive. On the other hand Russell was contemporary with Spencer-Brown, in the nineteensixties. I would suggest Russell´s daughter to take part at the "Me too"- debate, for her being taken advantage of in the process of advertisement of "Laws Of Form". That was not very metaphysical or transcendental (categorical imperative, path is goal, and so on). Anyways, do inquiry blocks follow a certain pattern, like, declaring one aspect of philosophy for the main one, and others for epiphenomena or even irrelevant ones?.
Best, Helmut

 08. Juni 2018 um 16:44 Uhr
 "Stephen Curtiss Rose" 
wrote:


Wittgenstein, Peirce, and Nietzsche fit together and seeing that seems to me almost key to figuring out where we need to go. Of the three Peirce is the heavy lifter, Nietzsche the brush clearer and Wittgenstein the assent CSP needs to say what he does about science, metaphysics, and semiotics.

 








amazon.com/author/stephenrose








 

On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:39 AM,  wrote:

John,

Well put, indeed!

Kirsti M.

John F Sowa kirjoitti 3.6.2018 00:57:
On 6/2/2018 5:33 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
I vaguely recall that [Wittgenstein] said like: "About (this or that)
you must not speak"... I just remember that when I read it, I thought:
"No, you don´t tell me when to shut up".

That was from the his first book, the Tractatus.  He wrote that
while he was still following his mentors, Frege and Russell.

Russell and Carnap loved that book, because they misunderstood
his point.  There is much more to say.

Please read the signproc.pdf article.

John



-
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 .




 


- 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 .




-
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 .

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

2018-06-02 Thread Helmut Raulien 
 
 

Supp: He said: "Was sich überhaupt sagen läßt, läßt sich klar sagen; und wovon man nicht reden kann, darüber muß man schweigen.“ "What can be said at all, can be said clearly, and what cannot be talked about, must be silent about". Assuming, that a good philosopher usually does not utter tautologies, I take this for an inquiry-block. But I guess he just had a bad day then, but otherwise was a good philosopher too.




John, list,

maybe they just have been angry when saying so? Didn´t Wittgenstein too say something inquiry-blocking like that once? I vaguely recall that he said something like: "About (this or that) you must not speak". I don´t remember, was it about what you cannot define, what you cannot imagine, what you have not experienced, or whatever. I just remember that when I read it, I thought: "No, you don´t tell me when to shut up".

Best, helmut

 

, 02. Juni 2018 um 23:07 Uhr
: "John F Sowa" 
wrote:

On 6/2/2018 3:45 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
> some of these dualities (e.g.: Nominalism/universalism,
> semantics/semiotics, linguistic turn/cognitive turn,
> empiricism/metaphysics) are not necessarily antinomies, but may
> be regarded for theses/antitheses, that may merge to syntheses,
> dialectically. Isnt that so?

The ones that are complementary, not contradictory, can be the
basis for a synthesis. That's true of many of them. But there
is no synthesis of open-mind vs closed-mind.

A commonality that characterizes Frege, Russell, Carnap, Quine,
and the movements of behaviorism and logical positivism is that
they all blocked the way of inquiry. Each one said, in effect,

I do not know how to explore the following topics. Therefore,
thou shalt not ask any question or think any thought about them.

I admit that I learned a lot about logic from them, but I also
learned that their research guidance is toxic to creativity.

I have a deadline to finish, so I won't be able to say more now.
But the article "Signs, processes, and language games" summarizes
the issues: http://jfsowa.com/pubs/signproc.pdf

John

-
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 .



 




- 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 .




-
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 .

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

2018-06-02 Thread Helmut Raulien 

John, list,

maybe they just have been angry when saying so? Didn´t Wittgenstein too say something inquiry-blocking like that once? I vaguely recall that he said something like: "About (this or that) you must not speak". I don´t remember, was it about what you cannot define, what you cannot imagine, what you have not experienced, or whatever. I just remember that when I read it, I thought: "No, you don´t tell me when to shut up".

Best, helmut

 

, 02. Juni 2018 um 23:07 Uhr
: "John F Sowa" 
wrote:

On 6/2/2018 3:45 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
> some of these dualities (e.g.: Nominalism/universalism,
> semantics/semiotics, linguistic turn/cognitive turn,
> empiricism/metaphysics) are not necessarily antinomies, but may
> be regarded for theses/antitheses, that may merge to syntheses,
> dialectically. Isnt that so?

The ones that are complementary, not contradictory, can be the
basis for a synthesis. That's true of many of them. But there
is no synthesis of open-mind vs closed-mind.

A commonality that characterizes Frege, Russell, Carnap, Quine,
and the movements of behaviorism and logical positivism is that
they all blocked the way of inquiry. Each one said, in effect,

I do not know how to explore the following topics. Therefore,
thou shalt not ask any question or think any thought about them.

I admit that I learned a lot about logic from them, but I also
learned that their research guidance is toxic to creativity.

I have a deadline to finish, so I won't be able to say more now.
But the article "Signs, processes, and language games" summarizes
the issues: http://jfsowa.com/pubs/signproc.pdf

John

-
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 .



 




-
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 .

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

2018-06-02 Thread Helmut Raulien 
 
 

Supplement: Maybe too, I suffer from disharmonyphopia, or am harmony-addicted, so always look for compatibility instead of contradiction. And I like Noam Chomsky.




John, list,

In the list I often sense, not only in your posts, a strong antipathy against certain philosophers and their theories. On one hand I understand that, because I have felt something like that too, against Skinner and his behaviourism. Not to speak of Nietzsche, his resentful refution-attempt of values, and his superman. On the other hand I suspect, that some of these dualities (e.g.: Nominalism/universalism, semantics/semiotics, linguistic turn/cognitive turn, empiricism/metaphysics) are not necessarily antinomies, but may be regarded for theses/antitheses, that may merge to syntheses, dialectically. Isnt that so? It is only a hunch of mine, as I have not studied these theories thoroughly. But all these opponental philosophers did not always mutually refuse to attend each other´s meetings. They also talked with each other and learned from each other, or so it says on Wikipedia. I guess, or suspect, that some opposing -isms are not either-or-matters, but merely different approaches, namely top-down-method versus bottom-up-method. Just guessing, more or less.

Best, Helmut

 

01. Juni 2018 um 16:56 Uhr
 "John F Sowa" 
wrote:

Mary,

> My previous post was intended for John alone. Please ignore it.
> I apologize for my mistake.

Please don't apologize. I'm glad to get the free advertising.

> reading Joyce’s ouevre, reading Peirce (whom I think Joyce read in 1903-4
> when he reviewed FCS Schiller’s book on pragmatism in a Dublin paper),
> and this, because it shows me the best so-far explanation of what world-
> representation-language-logic games Joyce was experimenting with.

That led me to your article, which elaborates that point:
https://www.academia.edu/30720270/James_Joyces_comments_on_pragmatism_in_Review_of_Humanism_by_Ferdinand_Channing_Scott_Schiller

The connection between logic, language, philosophy, and literature,
which Joyce recognized, was undermined by the misguided program of
Frege, Russell, Carnap, and Quine. I believe that philosophy, logic,
and the world today would have been much better if logicians and
philosophers had followed Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein.

As just one example, Carnap's most serious denunciation was
"That's poetry!" But Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein had
appreciated the insights of poetry and literature. Wittgenstein
visited the Vienna Circlers several times, but he refused to
attend any meeting at which Carnap would be present.

For the fact that the development of logic did not depend on anything
that Frege wrote, see "Peirce the Logician" by Hilary Putnam:
http://jfsowa.com/peirce/putnam.htm

For the other issues, see "Signs, processes, and language games",
http://jfsowa.com/pubs/signproc.pdf

John

-
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 .



 




- 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 .




-
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 .

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

2018-06-02 Thread Helmut Raulien 

John, list,

In the list I often sense, not only in your posts, a strong antipathy against certain philosophers and their theories. On one hand I understand that, because I have felt something like that too, against Skinner and his behaviourism. Not to speak of Nietzsche, his resentful refution-attempt of values, and his superman. On the other hand I suspect, that some of these dualities (e.g.: Nominalism/universalism, semantics/semiotics, linguistic turn/cognitive turn, empiricism/metaphysics) are not necessarily antinomies, but may be regarded for theses/antitheses, that may merge to syntheses, dialectically. Isnt that so? It is only a hunch of mine, as I have not studied these theories thoroughly. But all these opponental philosophers did not always mutually refuse to attend each other´s meetings. They also talked with each other and learned from each other, or so it says on Wikipedia. I guess, or suspect, that some opposing -isms are not either-or-matters, but merely different approaches, namely top-down-method versus bottom-up-method. Just guessing, more or less.

Best, Helmut

 

01. Juni 2018 um 16:56 Uhr
 "John F Sowa" 
wrote:

Mary,

> My previous post was intended for John alone. Please ignore it.
> I apologize for my mistake.

Please don't apologize. I'm glad to get the free advertising.

> reading Joyce’s ouevre, reading Peirce (whom I think Joyce read in 1903-4
> when he reviewed FCS Schiller’s book on pragmatism in a Dublin paper),
> and this, because it shows me the best so-far explanation of what world-
> representation-language-logic games Joyce was experimenting with.

That led me to your article, which elaborates that point:
https://www.academia.edu/30720270/James_Joyces_comments_on_pragmatism_in_Review_of_Humanism_by_Ferdinand_Channing_Scott_Schiller

The connection between logic, language, philosophy, and literature,
which Joyce recognized, was undermined by the misguided program of
Frege, Russell, Carnap, and Quine. I believe that philosophy, logic,
and the world today would have been much better if logicians and
philosophers had followed Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein.

As just one example, Carnap's most serious denunciation was
"That's poetry!" But Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein had
appreciated the insights of poetry and literature. Wittgenstein
visited the Vienna Circlers several times, but he refused to
attend any meeting at which Carnap would be present.

For the fact that the development of logic did not depend on anything
that Frege wrote, see "Peirce the Logician" by Hilary Putnam:
http://jfsowa.com/peirce/putnam.htm

For the other issues, see "Signs, processes, and language games",
http://jfsowa.com/pubs/signproc.pdf

John

-
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 .



 




-
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 .