Yes! The remedy for it, as you put well in another message, is to think
about what the practical consequences would actually be.
Cheers, Cathy
-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Udell [mailto:bud...@nyc.rr.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 24 September 2014 6:27 a.m.
To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Fallacy Of Misplaced Essence (FOME)
GR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14293
CG:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14294
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14295
Dear Clark, lists -
But aren't formal and material causes just re-baptized in physics as constants
(of laws), as types of forces or particles, or as boundary conditions?
Best
F
Den 22/09/2014 kl. 15.59 skrev Clark Goble
cl...@lextek.commailto:cl...@lextek.com
:
On Sep 21, 2014, at 9:13
Dear E, G, lists
I also have no idea as to how Peirce would pronounce it.
I chose dee-see- for these reasons:
The C I pronounce as S for the reasons Edwina quotes - in the traditional
pronunciation of Latin words, C is generally S before front wovels like I
The I I pronounce as EE because that
Dear John, lists,
I think you're right - Peirce saw thought as an argument chain whose resting
points were propositions.
Best
F
Den 22/09/2014 kl. 18.46 skrev John Collier
colli...@ukzn.ac.zamailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za
:
At 01:41 PM 2014-09-13, Frederik wrote:
Dear Sung, lists -
To take thought
Dear John, lists
OK, that clarifies things.
Best
f
Den 23/09/2014 kl. 11.35 skrev John Collier
colli...@ukzn.ac.zamailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za
:
At 10:50 PM 2014-09-21, Frederik wrote:
Dear Stan, lists,
The problem here is a bit as when Collier thought all the world was in the
head - for where
Clark, yes, that's one reason I've been recommending Kaina Stoicheia as a
supplementary text for this seminar, because it's mostly about propositions but
also about the New Elements *of the logic of mathematics*. I'm certainly not
a mathematician myself, but I don't think one can get a good
Edwina, lists,
In the ten-sign list of the Syllabus, the Dicent Symbolic Legisign is but one
of three types of Dicisigns. So you can not identify the two. I discuss the
other two, Dicent Indexical Sinsign and Dicent Indexical Sinsign, in the
chapter.
Best
F
Den 24/09/2014 kl. 15.16 skrev
Jon, I think it would be better if you would combine the quotes from NP and
your comments in a single message. It would also be better if you (and
everyone) would send posts only to the list(s), i.e. delete the addresses of
individuals from your address field before you send, as that would avoid
Dear Clark, lists,
Den 24/09/2014 kl. 22.17 skrev Clark Goble
cl...@lextek.commailto:cl...@lextek.com
:
On Sep 24, 2014, at 1:16 PM, Gary Richmond
gary.richm...@gmail.commailto:gary.richm...@gmail.com wrote:
In any event, I'm finding section 4. of New Elements of especial interest and
want
Dear C, B, lists -
Scares me as well - is this really so widespread among philosophy students? Why
don't they study sociology instead, then?
And why should we be culturally sensitive at all? We have only reached to
where we are now by being INsensitive to a lot of cultural ideas - including
Frederik, Lists,
You say: Peirce saw thought as an argument chain whose resting points were
propositions.
For the sake of sorting through some of the disagreements that have been voiced
about what kinds of signs or representamens may be found in the physical,
chemical, biological or social
Signs are sufficiently diffuse and vague as to have an almost spectral
entity. I see consciousness as the willed condition in which signs become
visible or perceptible and thought as a description of the entire
consideration of which this is the start. The next thing that happens is
naming. sign
Beyond the Correspondence Theory of Truth:
HP:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14168
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14169
HP:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14177
List, Jon:
Kant and chemical semiotics are polar opposites. Kant did not accept the
possibility of quantification of chemistry.
from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-science/
In the Preface to the Metaphysical Foundations Kant claims that chemistry, at
least as he understood it in
On Sep 25, 2014, at 8:50 AM, Frederik Stjernfelt stj...@hum.ku.dk wrote:
This isn’t to say Heidegger and Peirce are the same. Just that I think the
move towards an externalist approach to mind in Heidegger is also made in
Peirce. And it’s precisely within the proposition (or more
Dear Gary, lists -
This is correct. This is also why not every phase of thought needs
consciousness - even if Peirce was very insistent on thought being
self-controlled. But he also realized self-control come in many degrees, not
all of them necessarily conscious - even if consciousness
On Sep 25, 2014, at 8:48 AM, Gary Fuhrman g...@gnusystems.ca wrote:
Stephen, Peirce sees conscious thinking as Thought (i.e. a sign) actively
taking consciousness and directing it, rather than the other way round, as
you here (and most people generally) see it. That’s one reason why
Peircers,
We, at least some of us, have discussed the Kaina Stoicheia on many previous
occasions. To save myself some typing I went searching the web and my ZZZ
sleeper files to see if I could find a few bits that I had copied out before.
I discovered that I had actually started a Wikipedia
Peircers,
A bit more poking around reveals that I created the
Wikipedia article on May 7, 2006. It looks like it
got absorbed into the main article on C.S. Peirce.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kaina_Stoicheiaoldid=51937343
It appears that I found this passage to be of primary
Howard, lists,
You snipped a bit too much of what I said. I was talking about
mathematics not just in the sense of doing the math, but of the
mathematical objects themselves. You switch between the objects that one
considers, and one's considering of the objects, and end up comparing
apples
Peircers,
I found the passage I was looking for:
http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-November/003190.html
I'm thinking it may be worth redoing in a blog post
if the graphic gets too mushed over in this format.
I don't think it can be possible to sum up the essence of a symbol any more
Jon, you might mention that there are at least two complete copies of Kaina
Stoicheia on the web, one at Arisbe
http://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/menu/library/bycsp/stoicheia/stoicheia.htm
and one at my site http://www.gnusystems.ca/KainaStoicheia.htm
- so again, I don't see the point of posting an
23 matches
Mail list logo
