Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Jon Alan Schmidt]

List:

This attachment has a corrected version of the third EG.  I also now
realize that in light of the transformation rules, the second EG is
unsuccessful at capturing how the triadic relation of mediating is *irreducible
*to the dyadic relations of determining.

Jon S.

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 4:55 PM Jon Alan Schmidt 
wrote:

> Jeff, List:
>
> Please provide specific quotes from "The Logic of Mathematics" (or other
> writings of Peirce) to support your claim that "any sign that is general in
> character ... have the nature of genuine triadic relations."  If that were
> the case, then what would be the three correlates of such relations?
> Instead, my understanding is that the triadic relation is that of 
> *representing
> *or (more generally) *mediating*.
>
>
> CSP:  I will say that a sign is anything, of whatsoever mode of being,
> which mediates between an object and an interpretant; since it is both
> determined by the object *relatively to the interpretant*, and determines
> the interpretant *in reference to the object*, in such wise as to cause
> the interpretant to be determined by the object through the mediation of
> this "sign." (EP 2:410; 1907)
>
>
> This is reflected by the first EG in the attachment.  As Peirce stated
> here, there are also *dyadic *relations between the Object and the Sign,
> and between the Sign and the Interpretant--namely, that of *determining*--but
> the triadic relation cannot be *reduced *to these.  The second EG in the
> attachment is my initial attempt to diagram this--in accordance with the
> dyadic relations, "the flow of causation" is from Object to Sign to
> Interpretant; but although the Object *also *determines the Interpretant,
> it does so only *through the mediation* of the Sign.
>
> JD:  You have focused on the first three clauses. What is implied in the
> 4th and fifth? ... For any interpretant that has a general nature, it will
> itself be a genuine triadic relation in its nature.
>
>
> I do not see anything in *any *of the five clauses from CP 2.242 to
> warrant treating *either *a Sign *or* an Interpretant as a triadic
> *relation*, rather than a *correlate *of such a relation.  On the
> contrary, clause 1 states plainly that "A Representamen [such as a Sign] is
> the *First Correlate* of a triadic relation," and clause 4 states just as
> plainly that "the possible Interpretant is determined to be the *First
> Correlate* of the same triadic relation to the same Object" (emphases
> added).
>
> JD:  In the process of representation, correlate A functions as a sign in
> relation to some real interpretant C, where that interpretant C, in turn,
> serves as a sign in relation to some further object D [to some]
> interpretant E. What does interpretant C represent to E as a sign? For one
> thing, it represents object B is the same object as D (or B corresponds to
> D in some way).
>
>
> My reading is instead that Interpretant C simply has B as its Object, just
> like Sign A; there is no need to posit "some further object D."  The
> difference is that Interpretant C is determined by Object B *through the
> mediation* of Sign A.  Likewise, Interpretant E has B as its Object, but
> Interpretant E is determined by Object B *through the mediation* of
> Interpretant Sign C.  This is reflected by the third EG in the attachment.
>
> JD:  What is more, the kind of genuine triadic relation that interpretant
> C embodies ...
>
>
> *Signs* are embodied in their Replicas (1903) or Instances (1906), but
> where did Peirce ever say that a *relation *can be embodied?
>
> JD:  Thus far, I've argued that all legisigns, and *a fortiori*, all
> symbols have the character of being, themselves, genuine triadic relations.
> What is more, I've argued that all symbolic signs are, in themselves,
> thoroughly genuine triadic relations.
>
>
> You have offered these *assertions*, but so far I am frankly not seeing
> any *arguments* for them.  Again, CP 2.242 seems quite explicit that
> Signs and Interpretants are *correlates*, not triadic *relations*,
> genuine or otherwise.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 10:40 AM Jeffrey Brian Downard <
> jeffrey.down...@nau.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hello Jon S, List,
>>
>> Does the sign itself constitute a triadic relationship? You say, No. It
>> is the first correlate of a triadic relation, but it is not itself a
>> triadic relation. Let me adopt the other side of the argument and see what
>> points I can marshall in its favor.
>>
>> First, I'd like to point out that any sign that is general in character:
>> (i.e., all legisigns, and therefore all symbols) have the nature of genuine
>> triadic relations. Legisigns have that nature in themselves. Symbolic
>> legisigns have that nature in themselves and in the relation that holds
>> between sign and object. That much follows from the

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Jon Alan Schmidt]

Jeff, List:

Please provide specific quotes from "The Logic of Mathematics" (or other
writings of Peirce) to support your claim that "any sign that is general in
character ... have the nature of genuine triadic relations."  If that were
the case, then what would be the three correlates of such relations?
Instead, my understanding is that the triadic relation is that of *representing
*or (more generally) *mediating*.


CSP:  I will say that a sign is anything, of whatsoever mode of being,
which mediates between an object and an interpretant; since it is both
determined by the object *relatively to the interpretant*, and determines
the interpretant *in reference to the object*, in such wise as to cause the
interpretant to be determined by the object through the mediation of this
"sign." (EP 2:410; 1907)


This is reflected by the first EG in the attachment.  As Peirce stated
here, there are also *dyadic *relations between the Object and the Sign,
and between the Sign and the Interpretant--namely, that of *determining*--but
the triadic relation cannot be *reduced *to these.  The second EG in the
attachment is my initial attempt to diagram this--in accordance with the
dyadic relations, "the flow of causation" is from Object to Sign to
Interpretant; but although the Object *also *determines the Interpretant,
it does so only *through the mediation* of the Sign.

JD:  You have focused on the first three clauses. What is implied in the
4th and fifth? ... For any interpretant that has a general nature, it will
itself be a genuine triadic relation in its nature.


I do not see anything in *any *of the five clauses from CP 2.242 to warrant
treating *either *a Sign *or* an Interpretant as a triadic *relation*,
rather than a *correlate *of such a relation.  On the contrary, clause 1
states plainly that "A Representamen [such as a Sign] is the *First
Correlate* of a triadic relation," and clause 4 states just as plainly that
"the possible Interpretant is determined to be the *First Correlate* of the
same triadic relation to the same Object" (emphases added).

JD:  In the process of representation, correlate A functions as a sign in
relation to some real interpretant C, where that interpretant C, in turn,
serves as a sign in relation to some further object D [to some]
interpretant E. What does interpretant C represent to E as a sign? For one
thing, it represents object B is the same object as D (or B corresponds to
D in some way).


My reading is instead that Interpretant C simply has B as its Object, just
like Sign A; there is no need to posit "some further object D."  The
difference is that Interpretant C is determined by Object B *through the
mediation* of Sign A.  Likewise, Interpretant E has B as its Object, but
Interpretant E is determined by Object B *through the mediation* of
Interpretant Sign C.  This is reflected by the third EG in the attachment.

JD:  What is more, the kind of genuine triadic relation that interpretant C
embodies ...


*Signs* are embodied in their Replicas (1903) or Instances (1906), but
where did Peirce ever say that a *relation *can be embodied?

JD:  Thus far, I've argued that all legisigns, and *a fortiori*, all
symbols have the character of being, themselves, genuine triadic relations.
What is more, I've argued that all symbolic signs are, in themselves,
thoroughly genuine triadic relations.


You have offered these *assertions*, but so far I am frankly not seeing any
*arguments* for them.  Again, CP 2.242 seems quite explicit that Signs and
Interpretants are *correlates*, not triadic *relations*, genuine or
otherwise.

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 10:40 AM Jeffrey Brian Downard <
jeffrey.down...@nau.edu> wrote:

> Hello Jon S, List,
>
> Does the sign itself constitute a triadic relationship? You say, No. It is
> the first correlate of a triadic relation, but it is not itself a triadic
> relation. Let me adopt the other side of the argument and see what points I
> can marshall in its favor.
>
> First, I'd like to point out that any sign that is general in character:
> (i.e., all legisigns, and therefore all symbols) have the nature of genuine
> triadic relations. Legisigns have that nature in themselves. Symbolic
> legisigns have that nature in themselves and in the relation that holds
> between sign and object. That much follows from the account of genuine
> triadic relations offered in a number of places, including "The Logic of
> Mathematics, an attempt to develop my categories from within."
>
> Furthermore, consider the following definition of a sign offered in NDTR:
>
> A Representamen is the First Correlate of a triadic relation, the Second
> Correlate being termed its Object, and the possible Third Correlate being
> termed its Interpretant, by which triadic relation the possible
> Interpretant is determined to be 

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Jeffrey Brian Downard]

Hello Jon S, List,


Does the sign itself constitute a triadic relationship? You say, No. It is the 
first correlate of a triadic relation, but it is not itself a triadic relation. 
Let me adopt the other side of the argument and see what points I can marshall 
in its favor.


First, I'd like to point out that any sign that is general in character: (i.e., 
all legisigns, and therefore all symbols) have the nature of genuine triadic 
relations. Legisigns have that nature in themselves. Symbolic legisigns have 
that nature in themselves and in the relation that holds between sign and 
object. That much follows from the account of genuine triadic relations offered 
in a number of places, including "The Logic of Mathematics, an attempt to 
develop my categories from within."


Furthermore, consider the following definition of a sign offered in NDTR:


A Representamen is the First Correlate of a triadic relation, the Second 
Correlate being termed its Object, and the possible Third Correlate being 
termed its Interpretant, by which triadic relation the possible Interpretant is 
determined to be the First Correlate of the same triadic relation to the same 
Object, and for some possible Interpretant. A Sign is a representamen of which 
some interpretant is a cognition of a mind. Signs are the only representamens 
that have been much studied. (1903 - C.P. 2.242)


Let's separate the clauses:


  1.  A Representamen is the First Correlate of a triadic relation,
  2.  the Second Correlate being termed its Object,
  3.  and the possible Third Correlate being termed its Interpretant,
  4.  by which triadic relation the possible Interpretant is determined to be 
the First Correlate of the same triadic relation to the same Object,
  5.  and for some possible Interpretant.


You have focused on the first three clauses. What is implied in the 4th and 
fifth?  For those interpretants that really are general signs in relation to 
some further object and interpretant, what is the character of such a sign? For 
the sake of the argument, let's set to the side interpretants that are, in 
themselves, mere possibles or mere existents. For any interpretant that has a 
general nature, it will itself be a genuine triadic relation in its nature.


Let me ask:  why is this important for the sake of offering explanations of how 
signs and interpretants function in the process of semiosis? As we try to 
answer this question, let us shift the focus of our attention from the anatomy 
to the physiology of signs and explain what is essential to their proper 
functioning. In the process of representation, correlate A functions as a sign 
in relation to some real interpretant C, where that interpretant C, in turn, 
serves as a sign in relation to some further object D interpretant E. What does 
interpretant C represent to E as a sign? For one thing, it represents object B 
is the same object as D (or B corresponds to D in some way). What is more, 
Peirce suggests, C represents the relation that A holds to B to interpretant E. 
C cannot really serve the function of representing such features about A and B 
to E without itself being genuinely triadic in character.


What is more, the kind of genuine triadic relation that interpretant C embodies 
is not a genuine triadic relation of quality (i.e., what he calls a law of 
quality) or a genuine triadic relation of fact (i.e., a law of fact). Rather, 
it is what  Peirce calls a thoroughly genuine triadic relation. These sorts of 
relations are special in that the general character of C, in serving the 
function of both an interpretant in relation to A and as a sign in relation the 
further interpretant E, is not a mere law. That is, it is not simply a rule 
having some sort of generality or some sort of necessity. Rather, as a 
representamen, C has the character of a living general--one that has life and 
is capable of growth. This is something that C itself possess as a sign.


Thus far, I've argued that all legisigns, and a fortiori, all symbols have the 
character of being, themselves, genuine triadic relations. What is more, I've 
argued that all symbolic signs are, in themselves, thoroughly genuine triadic 
relations. One reason they must have this character is that it is essential for 
serving, in turn, the function as a symbolic sign in relation to some further 
object and interpretant.


What should we say of signs that are, in their nature, iconic qualisigns 
(tones) or indexical sinsigns (tokens)? Without arguing the point, I would like 
to point out that they are always capable of serving as parts of larger 
inferences. I'll leave it at that.


--Jeff






Jeffrey Downard
Associate Professor
Department of Philosophy
Northern Arizona University
(o) 928 523-8354

From: Jon Alan Schmidt 
Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2019 11:48:58 AM
To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Subject: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

List:

Surprisin

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Jon Alan Schmidt]

List:

Surprisingly, the manuscript number in the design documents for the
memorial is incorrect--rather than 117, it should be 717, which is undated
in the Robin Catalog, but now believed to be from Peirce's 1893 drafts for *How
to Reason:  A Critick of Arguments*.  The reproduced diagram is on page 9
<https://rs.cms.hu-berlin.de/peircearchive/pages/view.php?ref=26185>, which
has the quoted heading, "Chapter II. The Categories," and the following
accompanying text.

CSP:  A triad is something more than a congeries of pairs. For example, A
gives B to C. Here are three pairs: A parts with B, C receives B, A
enriches C. But these three dual facts taken together do not make up the
triple fact, which consist[s] in this that A parts with B, C receives B, A
enriches C, *all in one act*. Take another illustration. There is a two-way
mode of freedom of a particle on a line from A to B. But if there is a
furcation of the line, so that it leads from A to B and C and from B to A
and C, there is an essentially different feature. Thus, in triads we must
expect to find peculiarities of which pairs give no hint.


Note that "triad" here and elsewhere in Peirce's writings clearly
designates a kind of *relation*--one with *three correlates*.  That is why,
as several of us have pointed out repeatedly, it is misleading to call the
Sign *itself *a triad; rather, it is the *relation *of "representing" or
"mediating" that is a triad, and the Sign is one of its *correlates* (A),
along with its Object (B) and its Interpretant (C).  By contrast, the
diagrams in CP 1.347 are from the Lowell Lectures of 1903, and are
explicitly intended to be Existential Graphs--which Peirce did not invent
until 1897, four years after drawing the diagram in R 717.  That is why
each has a letter at the Spot in the middle, where the name of the triadic
relation would go (e.g., "giving," "representing," or "mediating"), and
three Lines of Identity that would be attached to the correlates (e.g.,
giver, gift, and recipient; or Sign, Object, and Interpretant).

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt

On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 8:51 AM Edwina Taborsky  wrote:

> The 'three tails' is also found in The Categories in Detail; 1.347.
>
> Edwina
>
> On Sun 14/04/19 9:16 AM , Gary Richmond gary.richm...@gmail.com sent:
>
> Thanks, Terry. Best, Gary
>
> [image: Blocked image]
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>  Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> <#m_-5035772470175100631_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 9:12 AM Terry L Rankin 
> wrote:
>
>> On the memorial website (
>> http://monument.peirce-foundation.org/app/components/peirce-monument/medias/peirces-last-house-27112017-4.png)
>> the engraving appears to be attributed to the 1893 MS117, The Categories,
>> Chapter II.
>>
>> [image: A screenshot of a cell phone Description automatically generated]
>>
>>
>>
>> Still in One Peace,
>>
>> Terry Rankin
>>
>> rankin.te...@hotmail.com
>>
>>
>>
>> Join the Extinction Rebellion <https://extinctionrebellion.us/> (XR)!
>>
>> Join the XR Orlando Chapter
>> <https://actionnetwork.org/forms/xr-orlando-sign-up-form>!
>> Join the XR Orlando Facebook Group
>> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/XROrlando/>!
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Daniel L Everett 
>> Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2019 8:58 AM
>> To: Gary Richmond 
>> Cc: Peirce-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce
>> Monument
>>
>>
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks. I believe you are right about this. I consulted John Sowa also
>> and did my own searches.
>>
>>
>>
>> But if anyone on the list has a precise reference that would be great.
>>
>>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> On Apr 14, 2019, at 08:45, Gary Richmond  wrote:
>>
>> Cecile, Dan, list,
>>
>>
>>
>> Cecile asked about the symbol Dan photographed on the Peirce monument at
>> his grave site in Milford: Do you know what the diagram refers to? Does
>> it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to
>> symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?
>>
>>
>>
>> Dan had asked me the same question off-list. I believe it's simp

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Edwina Taborsky]

 

 BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}The 'three tails' is also found in The Categories in Detail; 1.347.

Edwina
 On Sun 14/04/19  9:16 AM , Gary Richmond gary.richm...@gmail.com
sent:
 Thanks, Terry. Best, Gary
 [1]
Virus-free. www.avg.com 
 On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 9:12 AM Terry L Rankin  wrote:
On the memorial website
(http://monument.peirce-foundation.org/app/components/peirce-monument/medias/peirces-last-house-27112017-4.png
[3])  the engraving appears to be attributed to the 1893 MS117, The
Categories, Chapter II. 
Still in One Peace, 

Terry Rankin 

rankin.te...@hotmail.com [4] 
Join the Extinction Rebellion [5] (XR)! 

Join the  XR Orlando Chapter [6]!
 Join the XR Orlando Facebook Group [7]!  
From: Daniel L Everett  
 Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2019 8:58 AM
 To: Gary Richmond 
 Cc: Peirce-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument   
Gary  
Thanks. I believe you are right about this. I consulted John Sowa
also and did my own searches.
But if anyone on the list has a precise reference that would be
great.
Dan  

Sent from my iPhone   
 On Apr 14, 2019, at 08:45, Gary Richmond  wrote:   

Cecile, Dan, list,   
Cecile asked about the symbol Dan photographed on the Peirce
monument at his grave site in Milford: Do you know what the diagram
refers to? Does it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know
where? With a  Y to symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it
was first in the semiosis?   
Dan had asked me the same question off-list. I believe it's simply
the 'turnstile'--an icon of any triadic relation, the A, B, C
applicable to not only the sign, but to any trichotomic relation,
phenomenological of semeiotic.
I believe it does appear in Peirce's papers (I've seen it before,
for sure) but I have not yet been able to locate the exact source in
a quick search. I'm sure some list member will be able to answer your
question more specifically and  soon. If not, I'll make inquiries at
the Peirce mini-conference in Milford this week.   
Best,   
Gary   
Gary Richmond   

Philosophy and Critical Thinking   

Communication Studies   

LaGuardia College of the City University of New York   

http://www.avg.com/email-signature%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dlink%26utm_campaign%3Dsig-email%26utm_content%3Dwebmail&data=02%7C01%7C%7C921286bf24a74a5e6f9c08d6c0d8e2c0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636908435075588743&sdata=vQfvkyKfOcLAMNyX8%2B7/duVKpNZ7QE8ieiDqSc9j09M%3D&reserved=0
[12]" target="_blank">

Virus-free.
http://www.avg.com/email-signature%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dlink%26utm_campaign%3Dsig-email%26utm_content%3Dwebmail&data=02%7C01%7C%7C921286bf24a74a5e6f9c08d6c0d8e2c0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636908435075588743&sdata=vQfvkyKfOcLAMNyX8%2B7/duVKpNZ7QE8ieiDqSc9j09M%3D&reserved=0
[13]" target="_blank"> www.avg.com   
On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 6:49 AM Cécile Menieu-Cosculluela  wrote:  


Thanks a lot! That's interesting. Do you know what the diagram
refers to? Does it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know
where? With a Y to symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it
was first in the semiosis?
 Best,
 Cécile
 - Mail original -
 De: "Daniel L Everett" 
 À: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu [16]
 Envoyé: Jeudi 11 Avril 2019 19:39:14
 Objet: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument
 Folks
 Thought you might want to see the new Peirce monument at the Milford
Cemetery. Just visiting in Milford today and tomorrow. 
 Dan
 [image/jpeg:IMG_2516.jpg]
 [image/jpeg:IMG_2517.jpg]
 [image/jpeg:IMG_2518.jpg]
 Sent from my iPhone
 [Fichier texte:message-footer.txt]   
 -
 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 [17] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to
PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu [18] with the line "UNSubscribe
PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm&data=02%7C01%7C%7C921286bf24a74a5e6f9c08d6c0d8e2c0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636908435075598752&sdata=R8Bz548NlMvme%2BqyIXZCoar/qly12rMTt9dZKdO%2Bnms%3D&reserved=0
[19]" target="_blank"> http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm
[20] .


Links:
--
[1]
http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
[2]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'rankin.te...@hotmail.com\',\'\',\'\'

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Gary Richmond]

Thanks, Terry. Best, Gary





<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 9:12 AM Terry L Rankin 
wrote:

> On the memorial website (
> http://monument.peirce-foundation.org/app/components/peirce-monument/medias/peirces-last-house-27112017-4.png)
> the engraving appears to be attributed to the 1893 MS117, *The Categories*,
> Chapter II.
>
> [image: A screenshot of a cell phone Description automatically generated]
>
>
>
> Still in One Peace,
>
> Terry Rankin
>
> rankin.te...@hotmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
> Join the Extinction Rebellion <https://extinctionrebellion.us/> (XR)!
>
> Join the XR Orlando Chapter
> <https://actionnetwork.org/forms/xr-orlando-sign-up-form>!
> Join the XR Orlando Facebook Group
> <https://www.facebook.com/groups/XROrlando/>!
>
>
>
> *From:* Daniel L Everett 
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 14, 2019 8:58 AM
> *To:* Gary Richmond 
> *Cc:* Peirce-L *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce
> Monument
>
>
>
> Gary
>
>
>
> Thanks. I believe you are right about this. I consulted John Sowa also and
> did my own searches.
>
>
>
> But if anyone on the list has a precise reference that would be great.
>
>
>
> Dan
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Apr 14, 2019, at 08:45, Gary Richmond  wrote:
>
> Cecile, Dan, list,
>
>
>
> Cecile asked about the symbol Dan photographed on the Peirce monument at
> his grave site in Milford: Do you know what the diagram refers to? Does
> it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to
> symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?
>
>
>
> Dan had asked me the same question off-list. I believe it's simply the
> 'turnstile'--an icon of any triadic relation, the A, B, C applicable to not
> only the sign, but to any trichotomic relation, phenomenological of
> semeiotic.
>
>
>
> I believe it does appear in Peirce's papers (I've seen it before, for
> sure) but I have not yet been able to locate the exact source in a quick
> search. I'm sure some list member will be able to answer your question more
> specifically and soon. If not, I'll make inquiries at the Peirce
> mini-conference in Milford this week.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>
>
> *Gary Richmond*
>
> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
>
> *Communication Studies*
>
> *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.avg.com%2Femail-signature%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dlink%26utm_campaign%3Dsig-email%26utm_content%3Dwebmail&data=02%7C01%7C%7C921286bf24a74a5e6f9c08d6c0d8e2c0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636908435075588743&sdata=vQfvkyKfOcLAMNyX8%2B7%2FduVKpNZ7QE8ieiDqSc9j09M%3D&reserved=0>
>
> Virus-free. www.avg.com
> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.avg.com%2Femail-signature%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dlink%26utm_campaign%3Dsig-email%26utm_content%3Dwebmail&data=02%7C01%7C%7C921286bf24a74a5e6f9c08d6c0d8e2c0%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636908435075588743&sdata=vQfvkyKfOcLAMNyX8%2B7%2FduVKpNZ7QE8ieiDqSc9j09M%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 6:49 AM Cécile Menieu-Cosculluela <
> cecile.coscullu...@univ-pau.fr> wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot! That's interesting. Do you know what the diagram refers to?
> Does it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to
> symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?
>
> Best,
>
> Cécile
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "Daniel L Everett" 
> À: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
> Envoyé: Jeudi 11 Avril 2019 19:39:14
> Objet: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument
>
> Folks
>
> Thought you might want to see the new Peirce monument at the Milford
> Cemetery. Just visiting in Milford today and tomorrow.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> [image/jpeg:IMG_2516.jpg]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [image/jpeg:IMG_2517.jpg]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [image/jpeg:IMG_2518.jpg]
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> [Fichier texte:message-footer.txt]
>
>
> -
> PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
> 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Daniel L Everett]

Gary

Thanks. I believe you are right about this. I consulted John Sowa also and did 
my own searches. 

But if anyone on the list has a precise reference that would be great. 

Dan

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 14, 2019, at 08:45, Gary Richmond  wrote:
> 
> Cecile, Dan, list,
> 
> Cecile asked about the symbol Dan photographed on the Peirce monument at his 
> grave site in Milford: Do you know what the diagram refers to? Does it appear 
> somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to symbolize the 
> sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?
> 
> Dan had asked me the same question off-list. I believe it's simply the 
> 'turnstile'--an icon of any triadic relation, the A, B, C applicable to not 
> only the sign, but to any trichotomic relation, phenomenological of 
> semeiotic. 
> 
> I believe it does appear in Peirce's papers (I've seen it before, for sure) 
> but I have not yet been able to locate the exact source in a quick search. 
> I'm sure some list member will be able to answer your question more 
> specifically and soon. If not, I'll make inquiries at the Peirce 
> mini-conference in Milford this week.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
> Gary Richmond
> Philosophy and Critical Thinking
> Communication Studies
> LaGuardia College of the City University of New York
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   Virus-free. www.avg.com
> 
>> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 6:49 AM Cécile Menieu-Cosculluela 
>>  wrote:
>> Thanks a lot! That's interesting. Do you know what the diagram refers to? 
>> Does it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to 
>> symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Cécile
>> 
>> - Mail original -
>> De: "Daniel L Everett" 
>> À: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
>> Envoyé: Jeudi 11 Avril 2019 19:39:14
>> Objet: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument
>> 
>> Folks
>> 
>> Thought you might want to see the new Peirce monument at the Milford 
>> Cemetery. Just visiting in Milford today and tomorrow. 
>> 
>> Dan
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> [image/jpeg:IMG_2516.jpg]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> [image/jpeg:IMG_2517.jpg]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> [image/jpeg:IMG_2518.jpg]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> [Fichier texte:message-footer.txt]
> 
> -
> 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 .

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Gary Richmond]

Cecile, Dan, list,

Cecile asked about the symbol Dan photographed on the Peirce monument at
his grave site in Milford: Do you know what the diagram refers to? Does it
appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to
symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?

Dan had asked me the same question off-list. I believe it's simply the
'turnstile'--an icon of any triadic relation, the A, B, C applicable to not
only the sign, but to any trichotomic relation, phenomenological of
semeiotic.

I believe it does appear in Peirce's papers (I've seen it before, for sure)
but I have not yet been able to locate the exact source in a quick search.
I'm sure some list member will be able to answer your question more
specifically and soon. If not, I'll make inquiries at the Peirce
mini-conference in Milford this week.

Best,

Gary


*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 Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 6:49 AM Cécile Menieu-Cosculluela <
cecile.coscullu...@univ-pau.fr> wrote:

> Thanks a lot! That's interesting. Do you know what the diagram refers to?
> Does it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to
> symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?
>
> Best,
>
> Cécile
>
> - Mail original -
> De: "Daniel L Everett" 
> À: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
> Envoyé: Jeudi 11 Avril 2019 19:39:14
> Objet: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument
>
> Folks
>
> Thought you might want to see the new Peirce monument at the Milford
> Cemetery. Just visiting in Milford today and tomorrow.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
> [image/jpeg:IMG_2516.jpg]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [image/jpeg:IMG_2517.jpg]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [image/jpeg:IMG_2518.jpg]
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> [Fichier texte:message-footer.txt]
>

-
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 .

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Cécile Menieu-Cosculluela]

Thanks a lot! That's interesting. Do you know what the diagram refers to? Does 
it appear somewhere in Peirce's papers? Do you know where? With a Y to 
symbolize the sign? And A for the object as if it was first in the semiosis?

Best,

Cécile

- Mail original -
De: "Daniel L Everett" 
À: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Envoyé: Jeudi 11 Avril 2019 19:39:14
Objet: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

Folks

Thought you might want to see the new Peirce monument at the Milford Cemetery. 
Just visiting in Milford today and tomorrow. 

Dan



[image/jpeg:IMG_2516.jpg]






[image/jpeg:IMG_2517.jpg]






[image/jpeg:IMG_2518.jpg]



Sent from my iPhone

[Fichier texte:message-footer.txt]

-
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 .

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Monument

[Gary Richmond]

Dan, List,

Thanks, Dan. Nice shots.

As some here may know, several of us are traveling to Milford next week for
the dedication of the Peirce Monument in Milford and a two day
mini-conference around that dedication. Rosa Mayorga, who headed the
monument committee, did an excellent job organizing everything from fund
raising for the monument to the selection of the architect and designer of
it.

Scheduled talks and remarks:

Welcome Remarks by Kathleen Hull and Nathan Houser.
Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen, Nazarbayev University, Republic of Kazakhstan,
President of the Charles S. Peirce Society:  “Publish or Peirceish”
Rosa Mayorga, Miami Dade College, Miami, FL: “Peirce in Key West”
Nancy Pinchot, Peirce Family Benefactor, Milford, PA
Céline Poisson, School of Design, University of Quebec, Montreal, Canada
Michael Raposa, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA: The Words of C. S. Peirce
(MS 277, October 6, 1907)
Kathleen Hull, Boston, MA: “Men of Genius” by Antoine Leonard Thomas (1765)
Thomas L. Short, Independent Scholar, USA: “Science in the Philosophy of
Charles Peirce”
Jaime Nubiola, Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain: “The Cosmopolitan
Peirce: His European Travels”
Richard Kenneth Atkins, Boston College, Boston, MA: “The Charles S. Peirce
and Francis Blake Correspondence”
André de Tienne, IUPUI and Peirce Edition Project, Indianapolis, IN: “A
Special Séance with Peirce: His Spirit Summoned for an Entertaining
Interview”

Cathy Legg, who, along with a dozen or so other folk including me, visited
Milford after the Centennial Conference at UMass, Lowell in 2014--where
there was much discussion as to the need to have an appropriate monument
placed there--very much wanted to attend the dedication and conference. She
is, however, presently teaching at a university in Australia and will not
be able to get away. She suggested in an off-list exchange that I take
notes at the conference (and the various activities surrounding it,
including a tour of Peirce's home, Arisbe) and send them to her. Should I
be able to put those notes into decent shape, I'll also share them on the
list.

Best,

Gary






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




On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 1:39 PM Daniel L Everett 
wrote:

> Folks
>
> Thought you might want to see the new Peirce monument at the Milford
> Cemetery. Just visiting in Milford today and tomorrow.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone

-
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 .

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce monument work - photo-images

[Jon Alan Schmidt]

Ben:

That is excellent news, thanks again.

Jon S.

On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Ben Udell  wrote:

> Hi, Jon. In response to your question:
>
> *"The Peirce Foundation reported about 3 months ago that we raised
> $16,615; it’s likely gone up some since then.  I will share any updates.
> We’re very encouraged by the great response." — Rosa Mayorga*
>
> Best, Ben
>
> On 8/2/2018 2:45 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>
> Thanks, Ben (and Gary R.).  Do you happen to know the status of the
> fundraising effort?
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Ben Udell  wrote:
>
> Peirce-listers,
>
> Gary Richmond has asked me to post the photo-images below, which were
> taken by John Pesavento of his work on the Peirce monument.  An stone or
> granite vase appears in a number of the images; I'm unsure what it is and
> it's not known who put it there; Peirce's urn was placed with Juliette in
> her casket and interred with her.  Pesavento laid the foundation of the
> planned granite monument. After this batch of photos, he straightened the
> Baudin marker and poured the concrete.  He took photos of that work too,
> which we may be able to send in a subsequent email.
>
> Each photo-image was over a megabyte in size; below are shrunken
> versions.  Of the fourth photo-image I provide both a shrunken and a
> cropped version; you can read the words on the tombstone in the cropped
> version.
>
> Later I expect to post the original full-resolution photo-images online
> where everybody can see them.
>
> *For more information on the monument, go to*
> http://monument.peirce-foundation.org/
>
> *Designer*
> Céline *Poisson* (professeure, École de design, Université du Québec à
> Montréal; with the collaboration of her students Charles Joron, Myriam
> Peixeiro and Jessica Charbonneau)
>
> *Monument Committee members*
> Rosa *Mayorga* (chair), Demetra *Sfendon-Mentzou*, Nathan *Houser*, Ivo
> *Ibri*, Robert *Lane*, Catherine *Legg*, Kathleen *Hull*, Fernando
> *Zalamea*, Giovanni *Maddalena*, André *De Tienne*, Richard *Evans*.
>
> *Fundraising Committee members*
> Richard *Atkins*, Nathan *Houser*, Robert *Lane*, Robert *Neville*, Rossella
> *Fabbrichesi*, Rosa *Mayorga*, and the members of the monument committee.
>
> Best, Ben
>
>

-
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 .

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce monument work - photo-images

[Ben Udell]

Hi, Jon. In response to your question:

*"The Peirce Foundation reported about 3 months ago that we raised 
$16,615; it’s likely gone up some since then.  I will share any updates. 
 We’re very encouraged by the great response." — Rosa Mayorga*


Best, Ben

On 8/2/2018 2:45 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:

Thanks, Ben (and Gary R.).  Do you happen to know the status of the 
fundraising effort?


Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt 
 - 
twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt 


On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Ben Udell > wrote:



Peirce-listers,

Gary Richmond has asked me to post the photo-images below, which were 
taken by John Pesavento of his work on the Peirce monument.  An stone 
or granite vase appears in a number of the images; I'm unsure what it 
is and it's not known who put it there; Peirce's urn was placed with 
Juliette in her casket and interred with her.  Pesavento laid the 
foundation of the planned granite monument. After this batch of 
photos, he straightened the Baudin marker and poured the concrete.  
He took photos of that work too, which we may be able to send in a 
subsequent email.


Each photo-image was over a megabyte in size; below are shrunken 
versions.  Of the fourth photo-image I provide both a shrunken and a 
cropped version; you can read the words on the tombstone in the 
cropped version.


Later I expect to post the original full-resolution photo-images 
online where everybody can see them.


*For more information on the monument, go to*
http://monument.peirce-foundation.org/ 



_Designer_
Céline *Poisson* (professeure, École de design, Université du Québec 
à Montréal; with the collaboration of her students Charles Joron, 
Myriam Peixeiro and Jessica Charbonneau)


_Monument Committee members_
Rosa *Mayorga* (chair), Demetra *Sfendon-Mentzou*, Nathan *Houser*, 
Ivo *Ibri*, Robert *Lane*, Catherine *Legg*, Kathleen *Hull*, 
Fernando *Zalamea*, Giovanni *Maddalena*, André *De Tienne*, Richard 
*Evans*.


_Fundraising Committee members_
Richard *Atkins*, Nathan *Houser*, Robert *Lane*, Robert *Neville*, 
Rossella *Fabbrichesi*, Rosa *Mayorga*, and the members of the 
monument committee.


Best, Ben


-
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 .

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce monument work - photo-images

[Jon Alan Schmidt]

Thanks, Ben (and Gary R.).  Do you happen to know the status of the
fundraising effort?

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Ben Udell  wrote:

> Peirce-listers,
>
> Gary Richmond has asked me to post the photo-images below, which were
> taken by John Pesavento of his work on the Peirce monument.  An stone or
> granite vase appears in a number of the images; I'm unsure what it is and
> it's not known who put it there; Peirce's urn was placed with Juliette in
> her casket and interred with her.  Pesavento laid the foundation of the
> planned granite monument. After this batch of photos, he straightened the
> Baudin marker and poured the concrete.  He took photos of that work too,
> which we may be able to send in a subsequent email.
>
> Each photo-image was over a megabyte in size; below are shrunken
> versions.  Of the fourth photo-image I provide both a shrunken and a
> cropped version; you can read the words on the tombstone in the cropped
> version.
>
> Later I expect to post the original full-resolution photo-images online
> where everybody can see them.
>
> *For more information on the monument, go to*
> http://monument.peirce-foundation.org/
>
> *Designer*
> Céline *Poisson* (professeure, École de design, Université du Québec à
> Montréal; with the collaboration of her students Charles Joron, Myriam
> Peixeiro and Jessica Charbonneau)
>
> *Monument Committee members*
> Rosa *Mayorga* (chair), Demetra *Sfendon-Mentzou*, Nathan *Houser*, Ivo
> *Ibri*, Robert *Lane*, Catherine *Legg*, Kathleen *Hull*, Fernando
> *Zalamea*, Giovanni *Maddalena*, André *De Tienne*, Richard *Evans*.
>
> *Fundraising Committee members*
> Richard *Atkins*, Nathan *Houser*, Robert *Lane*, Robert *Neville*, Rossella
> *Fabbrichesi*, Rosa *Mayorga*, and the members of the monument committee.
>
> Best, Ben
>

-
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 .