Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nurture and imitation as pragmatism

Jeff, List: To answer your specific question--no, I do not currently consider there to be an important distinction between Normal and Final Interpretants. In the context of logic as semeiotic, I basically take "normal" as meaning "normative" and "final" as alluding to "final cause." As such,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peircean research

Mike, List: MB: We could say that the phrase 'triadic action' approaches being a technical term, and we cannot deny that Peirce used it ... No one is denying that Peirce used it; on the contrary, I quoted the (only) two specific passages where he did so, and then offered my interpretation of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peircean research

Edwina, Even though you apparently skim-read my post (it took hours to compose, but minutes for you to respond) and missed, or misrepresented, or distorted virtually all of my points, I said that I'd give you the last substantive word. Suffice it to say that I disagree with most all of your

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peircean research

BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }Gary R, list From what I can gather from your post - you seem to be asserting that those who are studying 'logic-as-semiotic' have a specific vocabulary which includes not merely Peirce's technical terms but also

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Peircean research

Edwina, List, I'll make one last attempt at clarifying what my position is in the matters we've been discussing. But since we seem not to be making much, if any, progress in such matters as the terminology best suited to particular sciences, in particular, *logic as semeiotic*, as well as the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nurture and imitation as pragmatism

Jon S, List, Peirce draws a distinction between thinking according to a rule of thumb, which functions as a standard of what is normal, and reasoning on the basis of a principle of logic, which is governed by higher ideals. The difference hinges on the degree of self-control that is exerted

Re: [PEIRCE-L] A Sign Is Not a Real Thing

It also includes the consciousness (interpretant / 3n) which says, ‘That rockfall appears to be accidental,’ until further study accounts for it. Martin W. Kettelhut, PhD ListeningIsTheKey.com 303 747 4449

Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Culture wires the brain

I watched the move of folk like Dick Neuhaus and Mike Novak to the right and felt it was as much economic motivation as anything else. Both prospered. Meanwhile, Christianity and Crisis which was my roost at the time went under. The liberal move to the right has had no discernable effect on the

RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Culture wires the brain

The liberals of your experience remind me of the liberals that I used to identify with before I turned to the right. But times have changed, and the liberals of today are not what they used to be. This video clip reminds me of the reasons that I originally changed sides (I was ahead of my time

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] A Sign Is Not a Real Thing

Martin- yes - I agree. That means that the interaction between two individual entities functions within both 2ns and 3ns. Sometimes it is only within 2ns, as an accidental rock-fall but even that, includes 3ns as to how the grass that the rock fell on - interprets/reacts to the falling

Re: [PEIRCE-L] A Sign Is Not a Real Thing

What sets Peirce apart from analytic philosophy is his acknowledgment that the INTERaction (of individual actualities) is general/lawful, and it is real. Martin W. Kettelhut, PhD 303 747 4449 On Aug 9, 2018, at 12:46 PM, Edwina Taborsky mailto:tabor...@primus.ca>> wrote: JAS, list What is

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nurture and imitation as pragmatism

Stephen R., Stephen J., List: SCR: There is neither a reference to imitation nor mimesis in CP. Actually, there is. CSP: Cannot a man act under the influence of a vague personification of the community and yet according to a general rule of conduct? Certainly: he so acts when he conforms to

Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Culture wires the brain

Wow! The blanket lumping of liberals with the selected vignetter you give of fascist liberalism sounds a bit like Jordan Peterson skewering post-modernist French intellectuals. Most liberals in my experience are nonviolent, oppose war, and do not use clearly provocative lingo even if they are

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nurture and imitation as pragmatism

Hi Stephen. Quite clearly the regimen you suggest is a means of overcoming divisions and attaining understanding. but it is a necessity scarce event. Such things as interracial intimacy are more in evidence. I cannot describe how alienated I felt after an attempt to immerse myself into the

RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Culture wires the brain

HELMUT >” The "Left" do not utter "nonsense" by saying that there are more than two genders, but they (the "Left") are merely liberal, by not wanting to forbid anybody defining their own special gender, like "lesbian, gay, trans, both, none, or between man and woman...", if they feel one of

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nurture and imitation as pragmatism

>” There is neither a reference to imitation nor mimesis in CP. I am a bit >relieved.” Stephen, I regard Peirce as the Isaac Newton of mind science (that’s a compliment). However… to really test one’s theory of Mind, one needs to test their firstness. And to do this, one needs to immerse

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Beginning of Life a Triadic Action?

Mike, list Thanks for this post - and for your previous post on scientific and natural language - Yes, there are many hypotheses about the emergence of life; thermal vents being a strong suggestion but who knows which will be 'the infallible final' - but the key is,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Beginning of Life a Triadic Action?

Feynman in some of his teaching videos is disarmingly appealing in a way that any thinking such as yours is also appealing -- it has no airs and leaves room for understanding our limitations -- ergo fallibility. I am not sure anyone will ever explain origins to the satisfaction of that imagined

[PEIRCE-L] Beginning of Life a Triadic Action?

List, I think we can expand Stephen's suggestion, to which I think I agree, that triadic action is involved Peirce's pragmatic maxim. I think we can understand the supreme importance of triadic action by questioning how life began from inanimate

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peircean research

Triadic action is most probably actions that emerge from following the pragmaticist maxim. Along with expressions, they would be the substance of matters we "go upon", so to speak. That seems to me the point of his philosophy. amazon.com/author/stephenrose On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 10:15 AM, Mike

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peircean research

Gary R, Jon, list, +1 This is another thread that has devolved into silliness. No one is trying to deny Peirce's technical terms, no one is being obdurate, and no one is saying anything other than we use natural language to communicate, and it has

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peircean research

BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }JAS, list The words of 'action' and 'interaction' are not scientific terms. They are part of natural language. The words of Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness etc ARE scientific terms because they do refer

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peircean research

Edwina, List: Perhaps you missed my post last night quoting Peirce's own unambiguous opinion about the merits of exact terminology in all scientific (including semiotic) inquiry. CSP: As to the ideal to be aimed at, it is, in the first place, desirable for any branch of science that it should

Re: [PEIRCE-L] A Sign Is Not a Real Thing

Mike, List: I understand your point. In fact, I used to treat "Sign-action" as a synonym for semiosis, before discovering that Peirce *never *used that particular term, at which point I stopped doing so. Since you mentioned "triadic action," I wondered if Peirce ever used *that *term; and as it

[PEIRCE-L] Peircean research

BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }Gary R, list To reject the use of natural language in the study and use of Peirce confines this study and use to essentially an isolate cult of specialists. No-one else can explore Peirce because they will be

Re: [PEIRCE-L] A Sign Is Not a Real Thing

I believe that the subject line blurs too many issues. In various writings over the years, Peirce wrote about real possibilities. He also wrote about laws as real. In writing about modality, he distinguished three universes: the possible, the actual, and the necessitated. Actual existence is