Jon, List,
Cheers, Jon, that's helpful. I'm rereading your Temporal Synechism article
(https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-020-09523-6) at present which also helps
clarify some of these issues.
Best
Jack
From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu on
behalf of Jon
Jack, List:
JRKC: What role does dimensionality have in Peirce's schema?
I can suggest at least a couple of roles that dimensionality plays in
Peirce's thought.
CSP: The evolution of forms begins or, at any rate, has for an early stage
of it, a vague potentiality; and that either is or is
John, List:
JFS: Unfortunately, there was nobody to ask the pertinent questions when
Peirce was writing some of his most profound and puzzling ideas.
I agree, Peirce's intellectual isolation during the last years of his life
is a great tragedy. The silver lining is that we have thousands of
Quick scan reveals nothing novel a dimensional framework/problematic:
"Lorentz has already shown us a convenience in considering a time, if not
exactly as a dimension of time-space, at least as that fourth unit that
Hamilton adds to the three dimensions of space to make up a quaternion, and
Jon AS, List,
All these issues (and manyl many, more) are ones that students would ask,
if Peirce had any students to teach. The amazing productivity of the few
years that Peirce taught at JHU shows the value of open discussion.
Unfortunately, there was nobody to ask the pertinent
Just quick revision - the universe is surely four dimensional, not three (as
time counts as an added dimension).
If time is admitted as a dimension plus the three spatial, then the symbol
makes more sense (to me anyway). Habit requires time. It would also allow me to
make better sense of the
Edwina, Jon, List,
What role does dimensionality have in Peirce's schema? In his letter to Lady
Welby, he invokes the fact that the universe (as we perceive it, at least) has
three dimensions.
Is icon one dimensional in pure form (the medium is qualitatively the same as
its object, purely),
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}JAS, list
I think there are a number of issues to unpack..
1] I continue to be cautious about any reduction of the term of
'sign' to simply refer to the 'representamen' or node of mediation in
the triad.
John, List:
Yes, I have been contemplating the same parallel--when any EGs are
connected, the resulting system constitutes one EG. In fact, according to
Peirce, the entire sheet of assertion is one sign.
CSP: The sheet of the graphs in all its states collectively, together with
the laws of its
Jack, List:
JRKC: I'm flummoxed to tell you the truth because I take "thought" as not
necessarily cognitive but rather as something which is much more holistic
and/or spectral.
Peirce certainly does not limit "thought" or "mind" to that which we
typically describe as "cognitive." On the
List
1] I think it is important to be extremely careful of reductionism.
And to be careful of terms and their meaning.
First - Is a 'sign' the discrete triad or the mediative node, the
representamen or is it the process of triadic mediation?
2] As Peirce wrote -"No
11 matches
Mail list logo
