At 08:58 PM 9/29/2014, Clark Goble wrote:
HP: To get a fairer picture of how physicists think, please peruse
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069v1.pdfthis survey.
CG: I'd seen that before. While it's a great guide to
interpretations of quantum mechanics it really doesn't address the
nominalism
Lists,
By this time it should be clear to readers of NP that the subject/predicate
structure of the proposition in Peirces logic is generalized in Peirces
semiotic as the indexical/iconic structure of the Dicisign. In §3.4 of NP we
meet the most radical and profound and perhaps the most
Jeff wrote: all regularities-wherever they are found--may be conceived as
inference
chains. Those inference chains that are no longer evolving in their
embodied regularities no longer appear to be changing towards some end and
may, at that point in time, be conceived simply as mechanical
Jon, you wrote,
It has long been my practice to maintain a separation between original
source texts and their various interpretant texts and I continue to believe
that this is the better practice from the standpoint of both scholarship and
encouraging critical thinking than dicing and slicing a
Clark, list,
You wrote,
[CG] The line of thinking I was following was that generals, as
used by Peirce, simply has much narrower application possible than
universals like colors. It’s true that the universal yellow can be
instantiated by a limited number of objects but is treated
On Sep 30, 2014, at 7:24 AM, Howard Pattee hpat...@roadrunner.com wrote:
At 08:58 PM 9/29/2014, Clark Goble wrote:
HP: To get a fairer picture of how physicists think, please peruse this
survey http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069v1.pdf.
CG: I'd seen that before. While it's a great guide to
On Sep 30, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Benjamin Udell bud...@nyc.rr.com
mailto:bud...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
If one is a realist _only_ about things that one doesn't know, then one
implies that the real is not cognizable. I suppose that one could say in a
loose sense that one is partly an
Clark, list,
You wrote,
[CG] It’s a subtle issue that’s hard to get terminology for.
(Probably one should do a literature search and see how others have
solved it - but I don’t have time for that unfortunately) I’m not
sure I like more or less general either since the more or less
Gary F., Lists,
Although I found came upon the quotation below in searching for texts on
genuineness in Peirce, I've decided to give this post a new subject line
as it seems only tangentially related to dicisigns.
The passage (copied below) has interested me for years, so much so that at
one
Clark, list, sorry, a few corrections/additions in *bold red*. - Best, Ben
On 9/30/2014 1:58 PM, Benjamin Udell wrote:
Clark, list,
You wrote,
[CG] It’s a subtle issue that’s hard to get terminology for.
(Probably one should do a literature search and see how others have
solved it
Gary R., Gary F., lists,
Thanks for the reminder, Gary R. about renaming tangential threads. I
should have done that a while ago with some threads that I've been on.
Regarding conservation of energy: My understanding is that, in general
relativity it's considered not to be conserved in an
Thread:
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14286
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14290
GF:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14313
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14350
Ben, Edwina, Helmut, lists,
I can see from your responses that these issues of chirality and genuine
(vs degenerate) triadic relations might be approached from a number of
angles. I hope I haven't opened a can of worms by broaching them taken
together, although it would appear that Peirce was
(Changed the thread title since we’ve drifted far from natural propositions)
On Sep 30, 2014, at 11:58 AM, Benjamin Udell bud...@nyc.rr.com
mailto:bud...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
[CG] Whether the “nearly real” is good enough is a reasonable question.
Like you, I see it as good enough, but I
Gary, lists,
There's a new article on beta decay and biochemical chiral asymmetry:
Chirally Sensitive Electron-Induced Molecular Breakup and the
Vester-Ulbricht Hypothesis
Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 118103 – Published 12 September 2014
J. M. Dreiling and T. J. Gay
Abstract
Gary, lists,
GF: By shifting the emphasis (in his definition of fact) from that
Secondness to its *structure* -- which is that of a proposition or dicisign,
and therefore partakes of Thirdness -- I think Peirce was adding another
dimension to the mode of being of fact.
I would tend to agree
On Sep 30, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Benjamin Udell bud...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
Regarding conservation of energy: My understanding is that, in general
relativity it's considered not to be conserved in an expanding or contracting
universe, although it's still regardable as conserved in normal
Clark, list,
Thanks for the link, I failed to supply any. Even in cases where
Wikipedia is to be trusted, it's often too technical and jargony, as if
written by students for their professors rather than by professors for
the general public.
You wrote, ...Noether’s Theorem would imply
Ben wrote:
. . . some people think that the chiral asymmetry in
fundamental particles and forces may give rise to observed
chiral asymmetry in organic molecules in biochemistry.
One of the pioneers in this field is Dilip Kondepudi, a student of the
late Prigogine, of the Wakeforest University
Dear List,
As a recent veteran, (ETS 9/11/2014) I feel compelled to speak to this war.
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/editorial/2014/09/23/a-war-of-necessity/16125243/
Thank you,
Robert Eckert
-
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on Reply List or Reply All to
Robert,
This post has nothing to do with anything concerning Peirce-related
scholarship. Why did you post it to this list?
Best,
Gary (writing as list moderator)
*Gary Richmond*
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*Communication Studies*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
[O]ne cannot completely rule out the possibility that
whatever is responsible for the asymmetry of weak
interactions may also play a role in the formation of
primitive organic compounds.
I think it was D. Kondepudi who proved in his late 1970's (?) Nature
article the possibility of chiral
To: Peirce List peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] [biosemiotics:6834] Re: Natural Propositions, Chapter 2
At 12:24 PM 9/30/2014, Clark wrote:
To me nominalism is whether there are just particular things and not
real generals. I don't quite see how whether there's really
Robert, Ben, list,
Robert, of course I completely agree with Ben. I too thank you for your
service, most sincerely and most deeply.
I vaguely recall a message your sent to this list a few years ago wherein
you expressed something of the same or similar sentiment. I respected that
sentiment then
24 matches
Mail list logo
