Jon, Helmut,
I tend to concur with some of your analysis, Jon. Certainly it is essential
to remember that in the 1903 classification of signs that the three
trichotomies are, or perhaps more accurately, *represent* *relations*. But
it's equally important to remember that they are not, shall we say
Helmut, List:
One correction--in Peirce's 1903 taxonomy, the three trichotomies are *not *for
the sign, the object, and the interpretant. They are for the sign itself
(qualisign/sinsign/legisign), the *relation *of the sign to its object
(icon/index/symbol), and the *relation *of the sign to its i
Helmut and List---
It seems correct to say that the categories are correspondently represented in
phenomenal representamen that are signs and that such signs in turn are clearly
reflective of the categories, so that both categories and signs are likely
applicable to physics, whether physics is
