[PEIRCE-L] Second Call for Small Grant Proposals: God and Consciousness in Indian Traditions

*Please circulate widely. Apologies for multiple emails.* *SECOND CALL FOR SMALL GRANT PROPOSALS: PAPER INCUBATOR*

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Role of Copula in the logic of Grammars.

Jerry, I presented a talk at a Peirce session of an APA conference in April 2015. On slide 19 of that talk, I made the point that Peirce's EGs resolve a supposed ambiguity of the word 'is'. Some logicians claim that it's ambiguous because that verb can be used in three different ways. See be

[PEIRCE-L] Fw: Aw: Re: interpretant and thirdness

      Gesendet: Mittwoch, 06. Dezember 2023 um 20:02 Uhr Von: "Helmut Raulien" An: jonalanschm...@gmail.com Cc: "Peirce-L" Betreff: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] interpretant and thirdness Jon, List,   Thank you, Jon! Regarding the by you mentioned difference between "top down" and "bottom up", I gue

Aw: [PEIRCE-L] interpretant and thirdness

Jon, List,   Thank you, Jon! Regarding the by you mentioned difference between "top down" and "bottom up", I guess, that a theory mostly goes top down, attempting to follow reality, given that the theory (and reality too, of course) is not e.g. solipsistic or nominalistic. I mean, if it is a univ

Re: [PEIRCE-L] interpretant and thirdness

Helmut, List, The question is easily answered by looking at the triadic or hexadic classes of signs. In the first case, only the Argument is a sign whose interpreter is a Thirdness. In the second case, in the absence of denominations, it suffices to list the classes of signs that incorporate interp

Re: [PEIRCE-L] interpretant and thirdness

Helmut, List: Assignments of Peirce's three universal categories to different phenomena are not absolute, they are contextual in accordance with the relevant relations among them. For example, the sign, its object, and its interpretant only correspond respectively to 1ns, 2ns, and 3ns within their