Jeff, list,
To answer your double question at the end, for me your analysis hits pretty
close to the 'sweet spot' between the obvious and the dubious, or between
the already-known and the incomprehensible. But it's complex enough that I
will have to experiment some more with applying it to
Dear list,
Just curious.. but does this current situation count as one that can
benefit from logical investigation or no?
I mean, what does adherence to pragmatism prescribe?
*But first, what is [pragmatism's] purpose? What is it expected to
accomplish? It is expected to bring to an end those
Continuing from Lowell 3.12,
https://fromthepage.com/jeffdown1/c-s-peirce-manuscripts/ms-464-465-1903-low
ell-lecture-iii-3rd-draught/display/13937:
[540] The analysis which I have just used to give you some notion of Genuine
Thirdness and its two forms of degeneracy is the merest rough
On 1/13/2018 11:37 AM, g...@gnusystems.ca wrote:
I introduced the term “polyversity” and defined it in Chapter 2 of
/Turning Signs/,
Before I sent that note, I had searched that web page for every
occurrence of 'polyversity': http://www.gnusystems.ca/TS/dlg.htm
That web page has seven
John, I’ve changed the subject line here, as I believe the issue concerning
“belief in word senses” has been settled by yesterday’s posts.
Regarding the new subject, there are a couple of misstatements here that are
worth correcting, and my comments are inserted. There’s also an important
Gary:
I wonder what it could mean to be “bound by” a symbol introduced
> by somebody else, if (as you wrote) “the purpose of the person who
> coins a word should not constrain the way that others may use it.”
>
John:
To avoid confusion, anyone who uses a word should be consistent
with its
