Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce on the Definition of Determination

Gary F, Jon A,List, Let's take a closer look at Peirce's logical definition of "determines" in MS 612. Here is what he says: In doing so I must use, in a more general sense, a word which I have just now used in a special sense, and must carefully explain this more general sense, inasmuch

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Helmut: Thank you for that but a genuine problem is that I am a Second (Yes and *No*, Agent and *Patient*), and I say it’s not representamen, object, interpretant. Rather, I say “object, representamen, interpretant”. This is akin to my claiming that my view is the “sub specie aeternitatis”.

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

List, Going back to what Jon Alan Schmidt wrote about rule, case and result, I would like to make a detour concerning representamen, object, interpretant. That is, because I first  want to avoid the question (Edwina), whether rule, case, and result are essences, or relations, and postpone it or

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Aesthetics, Ethics, Logic "Jon Awbrey"

Jerry, No time now. You might try sampling some of these: https://www.google.com/search?as_q=Aesthetics%2C+Ethics%2C+Logic_epq=Jon+Awbrey Cheers, Jon On 5/2/2016 1:33 PM, Jerry Rhee wrote: Jon A, I looked over what you wrote above. There is simply zero mention of esthetics, ethics and

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile? Is The Theorem Really Third?

Ben, Gary R, Jon S, Edwina, List, I won't have a chance for a full reply for a while, so let me just state some of the basic principles that I have applied for almost fifty years now in the matter of “How To Read And Understand Peirce”. There is a long-running strain of Peirce commentary that

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Ben U., List: The assignment of categories to the three forms of inference is another area that seems unsettled. Thanks for the references that show Peirce's position in 1878 and in 1903. The latter reflects my tendency to focus on Firstness/Secondness/Thirdness as

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Jon A, I looked over what you wrote above. There is simply zero mention of esthetics, ethics and their connection to logic. That is, I don't think you understand what is meant by *essence*. If Peirce’s pragmatism is different from others in that these are necessary, then why is it that your

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Jon A., List: I gather that you believe this whole discussion to be misguided, but does that warrant blocking the way of inquiry for those of us who are still interested in exploring it? Perhaps the outcome will be a consensus that it is indeed a mistake to assign categories to rule/case/result

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Gary, All, I should have thought another old-timer would've recognized the allusion to Simon & Garfunkel's "Dangling Conversation": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nntOYUODSV0 Seeing as how this thread has been one of the more dangling conversations we've had on the Peirce List in a very long

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Jon A., Since we've been through this many times before, and I haven't time or patience to argue with you about it, I am going to let my response be a snippet (from an off-list email to a friend who is also a member of this list on the topic) and leave it at that. I wrote: "As to the current

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce on the Definition of Determination

Jeff D., List, I’ve been too sick to think straight for the past week, so pardon my belated response to your post, Jeff. My replies are inserted below.— gary f. From: Jeffrey Brian Downard [mailto:jeffrey.down...@nau.edu] Sent: 24-Apr-16 19:49 List, The first question I'd like to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Very well said. The categories are modes of Relations, not modes of Essences. Edwina Taborsky - Original Message - From: "Jon Awbrey" To: "Jon Alan Schmidt" ; "Jerry Rhee" Cc: "Gary Richmond" ;

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Is CP 5.189 A Syllogism? Can Categorial Analysis Be Worthwhile?

Jon S., Most of the old timers on this List have already heard and ignored this advice more times than I could care to enumerate but since you and maybe a few other onlookers may not have heard it before, I will give it another try. Peirce's categories are best viewed as categories of