Re: [PEIRCE-L]

List, Off-list I asked Jerry what this message meant and he responded: Hi Gary Someone was using my IPhone for transferring documents I have no idea how this message resulted! My apologies to the list. Cheers Jerry [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking*

[PEIRCE-L]

D B y Sent from my iPhonekheiydrk - 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

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Edwina, list: haha! It just hit me that (*B*, that which goes from surprise to suspect is true) can be re-written as: (*B*, Hence, *there is* *reason* to suspect is true). That is, B = reasons, accounts, justifications, support for interpretant (what the commens says). For example, B =

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Edwina, list: I apologize if I missed something but what you just stated was basically all only generals. What I am asking for is to apply those generals to the question of the pragmatic maxim and provide the argumentation, that is, the specific premisses (e.g., what is the object or

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Gary R., List: Thanks for the reminders about Sheriff's book; it was one of my first introductions to Peirce's thought, and I even re-read it recently, but I need to review the portions that you mentioned in light of the discussions in this thread. Thanks also for the additional information on

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

An object is a Sign; i.e., a triadic morphology of three Relations: O-R;R-R; R-I. A syllogism is a Sign, a triad - and the aim of pragmaticism, as I understand it, is to achieve that clarity of Interpretant to correlate with the Object as much as is possible within the connection/mediating of

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Helmut, List, Helmut wrote: ""Atum", the ancient Egyptian myth, as you wrote, is the state of the beginning, and it is nothing and everything at the same time." I do not subscribe to and am certainly not proselytizing the Kemetic myth, just offering it as a possible source (along with Tohu

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Woah...so, objects are pretty important. What would you say of the pragmatic maxim as object? What is its representamen and what its interpretant? Best, J PS. If the pragmatic maxim is not an object, then what is that object to which the pragmatic maxim points? On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 6:07

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

The object is a morphological existential embodiment of matter/mind. Operative within the triad [O-R-I]; i.e., it is a Sign. So that object, be it an insect or a rock or a word - is in itself acting as an Interpretant of other information [which has made it that insect/rock/word]...and is also

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Edwina, What part does the object play in that universe? Thanks, Jerry On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > Helmut - well, I'm an atheist and am also bothered by the anthropocentric > images of an individual Agential Creator - which, in my view, can't

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Helmut - well, I'm an atheist and am also bothered by the anthropocentric images of an individual Agential Creator - which, in my view, can't be empirically substantiated or logically validated - and ends up just being A Belief. A tenacious or authoritative belief. I consider the universe to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Gary R - thanks for your long post - I'll get to it when I've a bit more time. [Other than to say now that I'd agree that the 'Ur-continuity is creative and creating'..but not 'creator' - ie, I reject individual or seeming psychological agency; the universe is self-creating..and that is a huge

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

  Dear list members, I am afraid this is not very Peirce-related, but I want to say something about the creation concept, as I more and more am getting the opinion, that it is anthropocentric and misleading. "Atum", the ancient Egyptian myth, as you wrote, is the state of the beginning, and it

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Thanks, Gary. This is exactly the mindset of the KBpedia Knowledge Ontology [1], which has a triadic upper structure until typologies of natural classes come into play. This KKO structure is likely to undergo substantial revision over time, but the application of Peirce's ideas of the three

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Dear Kirsti, John, list: Ironic how something that is supposed to be (critical) common sense and a method to make our ideas clear, that it should lead to such lack thereof and even to passionate disagreement, eh? But not so surprising if one understands Socratic irony, which is to know why

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Jon, Edwina, Gary F, Soren, List, John Sheriff, in *Charles Peirce's Guess at the Riddle: Grounds for Human Significance*, in commenting on what Peirce calls the "pure zero" state (which, in my thinking, is roughly equivalent to the later blackboard metaphor) quotes Peirce as follows: "So of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Cosmology

Dear John, Jerry R., Thank you very much, John for your brilliant summary on the relation between nominalism and pragmaticism & Einstein and his theorizing. And Jerry, I would recommend a very detailed study of the two formulations by CSP, given in his first Harward Lecture (EP vol. 2)