List, Peter, Jon S, I very much regret an over-generalization I made in one of my posts in this thread when I wrote " . . I think that rather than 'imparting' "an ability to empathize with 'the other' " . . . that one needs already to possess that 'ability' to appreciate the analogy and respond to it. In the USA at least it would appear that many Christians, esp. of the evangelical fundamentalist stripe, have lost it (or at least suppress it)."
Jon S also noted that not all evangelicals are fundamentalists. In any event, Peter's on-list response to my remark prompted me to write him off-list. He replied that no offense was taken by him and that no personal apology was needed. But he thought that if there were evangelicals on the list (and I know that there are) that I might consider an on-list apology. I asked if I might forward my off-list apology to him as that apology, and he gave his consent. off-list Peter, I didn't mean to give offense by suggesting that *all* evangelicals have lost their compassion and decency. I attend Riverside Church in Harlem, a very social justice oriented church, and some of the pastoral staff and parishioners there have left their evangelical roots especially because of the politicizing of religion in recent decades, and especially in the so-called Trump era. They are all fine people, and I too know many good, practicing evangelicals who are not members of Riverside Church. Perhaps I am most sensitive to this because my spouse is African-American, and some recent events, editorialized in several places including the New York Times (see, for example, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ black-pastor-southern-baptist-convention_us_596e53d7e4b0000eb19667cc) suggest to me that at least in the South and South West that politics has in some pastors and their churches begun to trump (pun intended) compassion and genuine Christian love (Gene gave the example of the recent Georgia race, but there are many). Anyhow, I am a practicing Christian who should not be publicly making such generalizations as I just did and to which you properly reacted. Please accept my apology. I will make it public if you wish. Best always, Gary [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* *Communication Studies* *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* *718 482-5690 <(718)%20482-5690>* On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Skagestad, Peter <peter_skages...@uml.edu> wrote: > Some of my best friends are evangelicals or fundamentalists and thoroughly > compassionate people. Enough said. But Gene's references to both Pope > Francis and G.H. Mead strike me as highly relevant to my question, and I > will refer my sister to a few quotes from Mead. > > > Thanks, > > Peter > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, December 28, 2017 3:11:43 PM > *To:* Eugene Halton > *Cc:* Peirce List > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nativity scenes > > Gene, Gary R., List: > > How one actually responds to this or any other Sign (Dynamic > Interpretants) will depend on one's peculiar habits of interpretation > (Final Interpretants)--feeling, action, and thought--as inculcated by one's > upbringing and subsequently cultivated by one's deliberate self-control and > self-criticism. Observing one's different responses to analogous Signs, as > well as anticipating them in advance as possibilities (Immediate > Interpretants), can contribute to the latter process as a form of the > "outward clash" that always confronts us, perhaps calling attention to an > inconsistency in one's own character. In a sense, it is not so much our > initial responses that define us as how we respond to those responses. > > As a terminological aside, an evangelical Christian is not necessarily a > fundamentalist, and a fundamentalist is not necessarily a political and/or > religious conservative. Of course, Peirce would almost certainly oppose > fundamentalism of any stripe, including both the dogmatic and relativist > varieties. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.LinkedIn.com_in_JonAlanSchmidt&d=DwMFaQ&c=lqHimbpwJeF7VTDNof4ddl8H-RbXeAdbMI2MFE1TXqA&r=FDb_MiuBhz-kalFUhg0uAyMl7SzpVFxovBRZ5FwNBJY&m=aN7jp6iApO3C_w2v5WmgkcfFo_ThmgiB4LsM7iW41uI&s=nCPO-Ac96siInpxbxnaqE1HFu13jkQKMXgtEphNugkE&e=> > - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_JonAlanSchmidt&d=DwMFaQ&c=lqHimbpwJeF7VTDNof4ddl8H-RbXeAdbMI2MFE1TXqA&r=FDb_MiuBhz-kalFUhg0uAyMl7SzpVFxovBRZ5FwNBJY&m=aN7jp6iApO3C_w2v5WmgkcfFo_ThmgiB4LsM7iW41uI&s=oYb5Y2wN2EpfBbGyT7PRKTQ_1b0_SYlRIAwqz8N4g9Q&e=> > > On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Eugene Halton <eugene.w.halto...@nd.edu> > wrote: > >> Yes, Gary, perhaps I did not state it clearly enough. Without the >> capacity to be the other at the same time as oneself, key to Mead's >> definition of the significant symbol and to empathy, nothing will be >> imparted. With that capacity, the scene can impart something new to the >> witness, an identification of the family of Jesus as refugees with >> contemporary refugees today. One can experience "the other" as oneself, >> feel what that situation is, and presumably, have compassion for it. >> And yes, Gary, evangelical Christian fundamentalists in the US, such >> as the 80% of those in Alabama who voted for an accused child molester >> recently, disregarding the accusations and even often denigrating the >> accusers because he represents their political ideology, like all >> fundamentalists perhaps, have retreated into a bubble wherein the other is >> not simply denied, but attacked. Here callousedness replaces empathy, and >> "the other" is scapegoated. Mead's "ability to be the other at same time >> that he is himself" is reversed: the ability to not be the other at the >> same time that he is himself becomes the recipe for the loss of the >> capacity for self-criticism. >> Gene H >> >> On Dec 28, 2017 1:06 PM, "Gary Richmond" <gary.richm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Eugene, Peter, list, >>> >>> I very much like your analysis, Gene. You wrote: >>> >>> The implication here is that the experience of the nativity scene, with >>> refugees representing today as echoing Jesus as a refugee, imparts in the >>> witness an ability to empathize with "the other." >>> >>> However, I think that rather than 'imparting' "an ability to empathize >>> with 'the other' " (although it may do that in some, perhaps few, >>> individuals) that one needs already to possess that 'ability' to appreciate >>> the analogy and respond to it. In the USA at least it would appear that >>> many Christians, esp. of the evangelical fundamentalist stripe, have lost >>> it (or at least suppress it). >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Gary R >>> >>> [image: Gary Richmond] >>> >>> *Gary Richmond* >>> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* >>> *Communication Studies* >>> *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* >>> *718 482-5690 <%28718%29%20482-5690>* >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Eugene Halton < >>> eugene.w.halto...@nd.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear Peter, >>>> Peirce described the way in which symbols can grow over time. And >>>> clearly one of the meanings of the symbol of the nativity is the family. >>>> Feuerbach called attention to how the holy family symbol is a >>>> representation of the earthly family. Marx took it further by claiming that >>>> the holy family symbol of the earthly family is also a projection of the >>>> bourgeois family in his time. >>>> A year ago Pope Francis adapted the symbol to the refugee >>>> situation by including a Maltese fishing boat in the nativity scene at the >>>> Vatican, a reference to refugees arriving by boat. >>>> Perhaps George Herbert Mead can have more to say on this than >>>> Peirce, in Mead's description of what he termed "the significant symbol." >>>> In Mead's significant symbol the other is included reflectively in the >>>> meaning of the symbol: >>>> "it is through the ability to be the other at same time that he is >>>> himself that the symbol becomes significant." >>>> (From "A Behavioristic Account of the Significant Symbol"). >>>> The implication here is that the experience of the nativity scene, >>>> with refugees representing today as echoing Jesus as a refugee, imparts in >>>> the witness an ability to empathize with "the other." >>>> Gene H >>>> >>>> On Dec 28, 2017 9:34 AM, "Skagestad, Peter" <peter_skages...@uml.edu> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Listers, >>>>> >>>>> I have a somewhat unusual question. My sister is writing an Art >>>>> History thesis on nativity scenes and their contemporary relevance. An >>>>> example is one at a street mission in Trondheim, Norway, depicting the >>>>> Holy >>>>> Family as present-day refugees from the Middle East. Now the question is >>>>> what, if anything, might semiotics have to say about such depiction? The >>>>> answer may be obvious, but it escapes me, at least for the moment. Any >>>>> suggestions? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Peter >>>>> >>>> > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to > peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L > but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the > BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
