Edwina, Jerry, Helmut, List,
Peirce's writings are always worth analyzing, but there has been over a century
of research in the cognitive sciences, especially neuroscience. Peirce was
familiar with the research of his day.. William James, who was a professional
in that field, acknowledged tha
Jerry list
I'll answer within what I understand as ‘forms of consciousness’. Again - I
don’t know what YOU mean by the phrase.
But in comparison to your view, I’d have to include the processes of memory or
habit - even in primisense, which is a first primal awareness of ‘otherness’.-
as in a
Jerry, list
First - being scholar is not akin to a hat that one puts on/takes off.
But the real problem here is that I don’t know what YOU mean by ‘forms of
consciousness’.
You seem to differentiate them from ‘memories’. Do yo mean current experiences?
Therefore - I can’t answer your question
List:
Edwina:
Please step back a bit from your professional persona as a scholar.
Please ask yourself “what do these words mean in terms of my life experiences?”
Do you experience “forms of consciousness”?
How are the forms of personal consciousness you experience related to or
conjoined to yo
Jerry, list
I’m not sure of your question. I’m quoting Peirce. These terms refer to his
outline of ‘forms of consciousness’.
And I don’t see what your reference to aphantasia means.
Edwina
> On Jan 18, 2024, at 10:49 PM, Jerry LR Chandler
> wrote:
>
> List:
>
>> On Jan 11, 2024, at 3:
List:
> On Jan 11, 2024, at 3:52 PM, Edwina Taborsky
> wrote:
>
> Peirce’s outline of these forms of consciousness [7.551] of Feeling,
> Altersense and Medisense’ or primisense, alter sense, medisense. And, just as
> in his outline of the modal categories, these can be subdivided, so to spea
happened, semiotically.
Best, Helmut
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2024 um 22:52 Uhr
Von: "Edwina Taborsky"
An: "Helmut Raulien"
Cc: "Peirce List"
Betreff: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the
d rules of inference. That is
> conclusive evidence beyond any shadow of a doubt that Peirce's 1911 system is
> one of his most brilliant achievements.
>
> I'll send another note with all the references.
>
> John
>
>
> From: "Jon Alan
911 system is
one of his most brilliant achievements.
I'll send another note with all the references.
John
From: "Jon Alan Schmidt"
Sent: 1/11/24 6:13 PM
To: Peirce-L
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re
-
From: "Jerry LR Chandler"
Sent: 1/11/24 4:09 PM
To: Jon Alan Schmidt
Cc: Peirce List
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re:
Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)
Thanks for your answer.
We seem to be on differen
Jerry, List:
JLRC: The classical logic of mathematical reasoning (symbolized by five
signs - negation, conjunction, disjunction, material conditional, and
bi-conditional.
Actually, Peirce points out that only two signs are needed as primitives,
with the others being derived from them.
CSP: Out
gt; (thinking, medisense).
>
> Best, Helmut
>
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2024 um 18:28 Uhr
> Von: "Edwina Taborsky"
> An: "Jerry LR Chandler"
> Cc: "Peirce List"
> Betreff: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re:
Thanks for your answer.
We seem to be on different wavelengths.
> On Jan 11, 2024, at 12:24 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt
> wrote:
>
> We can substitute "headache," "orange," or any other common noun for "camel"
> in this passage.
It seems to me that there is a profound distinction between a categor
Jerry - frankly - I’ve never been a fan of Robert Rosen ; my reference to
entropy was more along the lines of Prigogine.
And yes- I consider that signs can be understood within the outline of the
Aristotlean syllogism. ..but I don’t see this triad as confined to the symbolic
realm of language.
> On Jan 11, 2024, at 11:28 AM, Edwina Taborsky
> wrote:
>
> But you already know this
Edwinia:
If I understood the meaning of the “triadic relations”, I would not waste my
time attempting to frame precise questions and intensely analyzing the
grammatical structures of your and other r
Jerry, List:
Every word is a token of a type--in Peirce's 1903 taxonomy, a replica of a
rhematic symbol or symbolic rheme, and therefore a peculiar kind of
rhematic indexical sinsign.
CSP: Eighth, a Rhematic Symbol, or Symbolic Rheme, is a sign connected with
its Object by an association of gener
: Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2024 um 18:28 Uhr
Von: "Edwina Taborsky"
An: "Jerry LR Chandler"
Cc: "Peirce List"
Betreff: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)
jerry
Yes- you can feel a headache wi
jerryYes- you can feel a headache without going through the rather complicated analysis that it’s a triadic experience.No- I don’t think the triad requires ‘exterior objects’ in the sense of being external to the person. You can mutter through your own thoughts all alone! But I think the notion of
Helmet- the triadic process - ie the sign meditation is taking place within the persons mind. EdwinaSent from my iPhoneOn Jan 11, 2024, at 11:43 AM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote:Edwina, List.Very interesting response.The absence of Persian terminology about semiotics is notable.In other words, I can h
Edwina, List.Very interesting response.The absence of Persian terminology about semiotics is notable.In other words, I can have a feeling of a headache Without any notion of triadicity!uThe question becomes one of the role of cognition in creating descriptions of experiences.Does this suggest to yo
Jerry - list
Ii think you yourself know the answer - but…let’s say, the word ‘ headache’ =
or any sound
1] If you have, within your mind, a developed, learned knowledge base that
recognizes this sound as having-a-meaning-, then, the triadic interaction is:
Sound-> Memory or Knowledge Base -> M
List:
Well, I will continue to search for an adequate semantic expression for my
feelings about the meanings (plural) of a triadic relation.
Perhaps it would be helpful to note that the meaning of “triadic” is a critical
part of the question, but not particularly difficult or controversial (ou
List
I think the quotations provided by JAS do not change the meaning of the
quotations I provided to show that the categories are described by Peirce as
having both genuine and degenerate modes. That is, the category of Secondness
has both a genuine and degenerate mode; the category of Thirdne
List:
For the record, Peirce describes the first, second, and third correlates of
a triadic relation as "simplest," "of middling complexity," and "most
complex" right before explicitly identifying the representamen/sign,
object, and interpretant as the three correlates of one such relation (CP
2.2
List
With regard to the use of the terms of ‘genuine, degenerate and doubly
degenerate’ - my understanding of these terms is that they refer only to the
categories. Not to the ’nodes’ and relations, ie, not to the two Objects or the
three Interpretants. .
For example, Peirce writes: “The Sign
Jerry, List:
I am honestly not sure exactly what all you are asking me to address here
and how my engineering background is relevant. What do you mean by "the
origins of the 'triadic relations'"? From what are we seeking to
distinguish Peirce's semeiotic? What do you have in mind as *semantic*
asp
Following Robert’s efforts to clarify meanings of terminology in symbolic
logics...
> On Jan 8, 2024, at 9:45 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>
> The directionality of semiosis is such that the object determines the sign
> while being unaffected by that sign, and the sign determines the interpreta
27 matches
Mail list logo
