List,
To me, feeling as firstness has nothing to do with pleasure, that would be secondness, or satisfaction, which would be thirdness. Feeling is a quality, pleasure a reaction, and satisfaction includes a mediation I would say. Why did Peirce mix these categories he himself had
print("HAL?");
if(laugh == T){
print(";)");
}else{
print("+9000");
}
Am 29.09.17 um 09:41 schrieb Armando Sercovich:
a1 b2
-
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
Referring only to this section, my questions are based around:
1[ This outline can only refer to a single man, whose beliefs are
'determined' by his past experiences/learning. This is relativism,
BUT -
2] Are his actions 'more reasonable' - understanding reason as
I've not seen a clearer set of signals from Peirce that we do experience
some satisfaction when we engage in a process of thought that results in
expressions and actions of a practical sort. Though he does not speak of
logic in this passage can there be any doubt that the reason he celebrates
Continuing from 1.3 (EP2:247, CP 1.594):
. All action in accordance with a determination is accompanied by a feeling
that is pleasurable; but, whether the feeling at any instant is felt as
pleasurable in that very instant or whether the recognition of it as
pleasurable comes a little later is
a1 b2
-
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
