Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 50
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}John, List
I think that Robert Marty's just posted paper: A critical analysis
of Belluci's paper - answers your questions.
Edwina
On Sun 19/09/21 9:02 PM , "sowa @bestweb.net" s...@bestweb.net
sent:
Gary F, Thank you for doing the work of extracting all the slides
and transcribing them to text that can be copied and discussed. Now
that each slide has been discussed separately, it would be useful to
scroll forward and backward through them and discuss their
relationships to one another, to Peirce's writings, and to writings
by other authors during the century after Peirce. It would be
useful to have an HTML file with each slide followed by the
transcription. But it would also be useful to have a pointer
following each slide to a recording of De Tienne's presentation.
After reading a slide, it would be good to jump to the recording to
hear what he said to the audience at the presentation. Do you have
any thoughts or plans about that? I admit that I have criticized
some of his comments. I certainly admit that he has a very strong
background in his long-term study of Peirce's writings and the years
of publications during the past century. But his final comments
about the science egg raise serious questions:1. Does Peirce mean
that phaneroscopy is only nascent as a science,
and not yet a full-blown one? But clearly phaneroscopy is no
ordinary
science. And yet he is sure that it is at once necessary and
fundamental ... 2. Is it a call for a community of phaneroscopists
to gather and start
institutionalizing the theory and practice of phaneroscopy? 3. Is
it because phaneroscopy is the first positive science that it is a
science-egg and will always be a science-egg? 4. Is it because the
ever-streaming Phaneron encloses EVERY
possibility, every actuality, every generality as firsts? 5. Is it
because it originates any inquiry in any domain? Is it the egg from
which all sciences get hatched? Does it need to be
fertilized? By what? 6. Can we break that egg? Is it good? Does
it have a sunny side or
is it hopelessly scrambled? These are important issues to discuss.
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 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 50
John, thanks for your continued interest in ADTs talk! It was originally
given as a Zoom webinar, and the recording of it can be played from the
University of Milan website: André De Tienne: The Role and Relevance of
Phaneroscopy for inquiry | Dipartimento di Filosofia - DIPAFILO (unimi.it)
<http://www.dipafilo.unimi.it/ecm/home/aggiornamenti-e-archivi/tutte-le-noti
zie/content/andre-de-tienne-the-role-and-relevance-of-phaneroscopy-for-inqui
ry..UNIMIDIRE-90701> . I must say it is not easy listening, given
Andrés vocal style and accent, and I think it assumes a graduate-level
acquaintance with Peirces writings. But it does explain the content of the
slides more fully.
Im attaching a text file (UTF encoding, so it includes some non-ASCII
characters, but no italic or bold formatting) of all the transcriptions I
did from the slides; at the top of it is the link to the IUPUI page where
the slides can be viewed in order (forward or reverse). I guess a single
HTML file putting it together with the slide images would be possible, but
not sure whether it would be worth the time it would take, and I would want
to ask Andrés permission first.
About the questions that you say are important issues to discuss, I dont
have anything much to say at the moment, but Im open to hearing what you or
other list members might say about them.
Gary f.
} For the clarity we are aiming at is indeed *complete* clarity. But this
simply means that the philosophical problems should *completely* disappear.
[Wittgenstein] {
https://gnusystems.ca/wp/ }{ living the time
From: sowa @bestweb.net
Sent: 19-Sep-21 21:02
To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu; g...@gnusystems.ca
Subject: re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 50
Gary F,
Thank you for doing the work of extracting all the slides and transcribing
them to text that can be copied and discussed.
Now that each slide has been discussed separately, it would be useful to
scroll forward and backward through them and discuss their relationships to
one another, to Peirce's writings, and to writings by other authors during
the century after Peirce. It would be useful to have an HTML file with each
slide followed by the transcription.
But it would also be useful to have a pointer following each slide to a
recording of De Tienne's presentation. After reading a slide, it would be
good to jump to the recording to hear what he said to the audience at the
presentation.
Do you have any thoughts or plans about that?
I admit that I have criticized some of his comments. I certainly admit that
he has a very strong background in his long-term study of Peirce's writings
and the years of publications during the past century. But his final
comments about the science egg raise serious questions:
1. Does Peirce mean that phaneroscopy is only nascent as a science,
and not yet a full-blown one? But clearly phaneroscopy is no ordinary
science. And yet he is sure that it is at once necessary and
fundamental ...
2. Is it a call for a community of phaneroscopists to gather and start
institutionalizing the theory and practice of phaneroscopy?
3. Is it because phaneroscopy is the first positive science that it is
a science-egg and will always be a science-egg?
4. Is it because the ever-streaming Phaneron encloses EVERY
possibility, every actuality, every generality as firsts?
5. Is it because it originates any inquiry in any domain? Is it the
egg from which all sciences get hatched? Does it need to be
fertilized? By what?
6. Can we break that egg? Is it good? Does it have a sunny side or
is it hopelessly scrambled?
These are important issues to discuss.
John
https://peirce.iupui.edu/publications.html#presentations
Title slide [1]: The Role and Relevance of Phaneroscopy for Inquiry
André De Tienne, IUPUI
Seminar presentation (University of Milan, Italy)
Philosophy as a Method of Thinking Practices: Phenomenology, Hermeneutics and
Post-Structuralism in the Light of Pragmatism
8 April 2021
[2] Plan of talk
⢠1. Phaneroscopy may be mystifying but is no mystery
⢠2. Reminders about Peirce's theory of three categories
⢠3. The place of phaneroscopy in Peirce's mature classification of sciences
⢠4. From mathematics to phaneroscopy
⢠5. Phaneroscopy as Inquiry into the positiveness of experience
⢠6. The Phaneron and its ingredients
⢠7. How to scope the phaneron and why
⢠8. Phaneroscopy's role and relevance for any inquiry
⢠Conclusion: Phaneroscopy as a science-egg
[3] Phaneroscopy is a sort of white elephant in Peirce studies.
Most scholars are familiar with Peirce's seminal theory of categories and its
association with multiple research areas in his philosophy, logic, semiotics,
and evolutionary metaphysics.
They are also familiar with that theory's association with what Peirce ended up
calling âphaneroscopy.â But as to what phaneroscopy is, the kind of
activity it co
re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 50
Gary F, Thank you for doing the work of extracting all the slides and transcribing them to text that can be copied and discussed. Now that each slide has been discussed separately, it would be useful to scroll forward and backward through them and discuss their relationships to one another, to Peirce's writings, and to writings by other authors during the century after Peirce. It would be useful to have an HTML file with each slide followed by the transcription. But it would also be useful to have a pointer following each slide to a recording of De Tienne's presentation. After reading a slide, it would be good to jump to the recording to hear what he said to the audience at the presentation. Do you have any thoughts or plans about that? I admit that I have criticized some of his comments. I certainly admit that he has a very strong background in his long-term study of Peirce's writings and the years of publications during the past century. But his final comments about the science egg raise serious questions: 1. Does Peirce mean that phaneroscopy is only nascent as a science, and not yet a full-blown one? But clearly phaneroscopy is no ordinary science. And yet he is sure that it is at once necessary and fundamental ... 2. Is it a call for a community of phaneroscopists to gather and start institutionalizing the theory and practice of phaneroscopy? 3. Is it because phaneroscopy is the first positive science that it is a science-egg and will always be a science-egg? 4. Is it because the ever-streaming Phaneron encloses EVERY possibility, every actuality, every generality as firsts? 5. Is it because it originates any inquiry in any domain? Is it the egg from which all sciences get hatched? Does it need to be fertilized? By what? 6. Can we break that egg? Is it good? Does it have a sunny side or is it hopelessly scrambled? These are important issues to discuss. 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 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.
