On 2/14/2018 12:32 PM, g...@gnusystems.ca wrote:
About Peirce’s formulations of the pragmatic maxim, I’m pretty
sure there are more than two in his writings
In his reply to Kirsti, Jon A cited his web page with 7 quotations:
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2008/08/07/pragmatic-maxim/
When one
Gary R., List:
In your original presentation of this thought experiment, the child was a
toddler and did not scream "Maman" or any other recognizable word, but
simply "Aie!" As such, I took it to be an involuntary reflex, such as any
of us likely would exclaim when surprised by pain, although as
Jon, list,
You wrote:
I guess I can boil down the main feedback that I am seeking to two
questions about the girl's scream.
For the child, as an *involuntary *reflex, is it a Dynamic Interpretant
produced by triadic semiosis, or merely an effect produced by a series of
dyadic causes?
. . .
Jon, list,
I often recommend close reading when examining the pragmatic maxim.
Perhaps no better example than to suggest it of #1 (CP 5.402), for there is
something missing in your transcription and it makes all the difference.
With best wishes,
Jerry R
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Jon
List:
With respect to the comments below from both Kirsti and Gary F., as the old
joke goes, "I resemble that remark." I am definitely someone who "often
finds that the thought is changed by the act of writing it down," and I
generally spend a lot of time (probably too much; almost an hour just
Gary f., list,
Your response presented as full an understanding of essential points in
my post as I could ever hope. Even more, I was greatly and happily
surprised.
And yes, of course there are any formulations of the ideas conveyed by
the two short expressions he gave a final stamp of his
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
Jon, list
This is simply too convoluted for me. I consider that the child's
cry is a semiosic action, a Rhematic Indexical Sinsign, an
unconscious physical reaction to an external stimuli. This is NOT
dyadic,
Kirsti,
I did give your post on ordinality and cardinality a second reading, and I
think I see your point, but I don’t have any particular response to it, except
to say that these logico-mathematical issues are likely to arise again as we
move on to Lowell Lectures 4 and 5, where Peirce has
Jon, List,
That is interesting, because for me the categories-topic is quite central (as the term "categories" suggests). But I see, that it may well be overinterpretation to apply the categories to everything, such as to matter and form of a thing.
I also agree, that there sometimes is
Jeff, List:
Given the consternation that often arises anytime we start talking about
"determination" on the List, I am not sure that--at least in Peirce's
usage--it is really any "simpler" than other concepts like mediation,
representation, signification, etc. The contemporary notion of
Gary R., List:
I guess I can boil down the main feedback that I am seeking to two
questions about the girl's scream.
1. For the child, as an *involuntary *reflex, is it a Dynamic
Interpretant produced by triadic semiosis, or merely an effect produced by
a series of dyadic causes?
2.
Kirsti, List ...
I did once collect seven major variations on the theme:
Pragmatic Maxim
Seven Ways of Looking at a Pragmatic Maxim
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2008/08/07/pragmatic-maxim/
Plus a sample of previous discussions:
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/?s=Pragmatic+Maxim
Regards,
List,
First I wish to express my appreciation to Gary f., to his lead and his
commentaries on LL. - However, it seem to me that the discussions tend
to get muddled on certain very, very basic respects.
Peirce's first formulation of the Pragmatic Maxims was about "practical
bearings". So it
13 matches
Mail list logo
