Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Jon, list: Here it is: “Keep your one purpose steadily and alone in view, and you may promise yourself the attainment of your sole desire, which is to hasten the chariot wheels of redeeming love!” ~Peirce Best, Jerry Rhee On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Gary R., List: GR: We've discussed in at least one of the cosmological threads of late the way in which Peirce does ascribe one sort of being to God, namely, Reality. On the other hand, Peirce held that to refer to God as Existing was clearly wrong, perhaps fetishistic, since existence concerns

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Nov 1, 2016, at 2:52 PM, Gary Richmond wrote: > > This is an interesting point indeed. We've discussed in at least one of the > cosmological threads of late the way in which Peirce does ascribe one sort of > being to God, namely, Reality. On the other hand,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

John, List, John Sowa wrote: ​ Gary Richmond wrote: > I think that [Peirce] was a non-traditional Christian--he once referred to his views as buddheo-Christian Those two traditions are not necessarily in conflict. ​ I agree that there are indeed points where Buddhism and Christianity can

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

On 10/29/2016 11:55 PM, Gary Richmond wrote: I think that [Peirce] was a non-traditional Christian--he once referred to his views as buddheo-Christian Those two traditions are not necessarily in conflict. Note, for example, the writings of Thomas Merton. For an overview, see

Re: CSP and Spinoza (was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology))

> On Oct 30, 2016, at 8:37 AM, jerry_lr_chand...@me.com wrote: > > To what extend did Spinoza’s effort to express meta-physics in terms of > Euclid’s geometrical mathematics, excite CSP to express his meta-physics in > terms of continuous mathematics and graph theory (as a dualism between >

Re: CSP and Spinoza (was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology))

I don’t have my library handy, but the following link might be useful for seeing that Kabbalistic/Spinoza tie that I think is relevant to Peirce. https://books.google.com/books?id=gZEgOxy_hXoC=PA186=PA186#v=onepage=false

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 29, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Jon wrote: "With that in mind, a unique aspect of Christianity is its > startling affirmation that God Himself entered into Actuality--" > > I don't think that the concept of 'god entering into actuality' is unique

Re: CSP and Spinoza (was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology))

Dear list: Dear list: I found an essay by Gabriele Tomasi, who speaks on Wittgenstein and not Peirce. He writes: “The German text sounds: «Das künstlerische Wunder ist, daß es die Welt gibt. Daß es gibt, was es gibt». This suggests that the miracle in question is in some sense worked by

Re: CSP and Spinoza (was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology))

On 10/30/2016 10:37 AM, jerry_lr_chand...@me.com wrote: see: http://www.pucsp.br/pragmatismo/dowloads/eip_15/15th_imp_shannon_dea_peirce-and_spinozas_pragmaticist_methaphysics.pdf for a very nice paper on CSP wrt Spinoza. I agree that it's "a very nice paper". It contains many excerpts by

Re: CSP and Spinoza (was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology))

Jerry C, list: I’d like to point out another interesting observation. Peirce says, “he identifies God and Nature, but does not mean by Nature what is ordinarily meant.” What he means by *ordinarily meant by Nature* is purposively vague. Would you say the meaning is decided? Best,

CSP and Spinoza (was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology))

List: > On Oct 30, 2016, at 12:30 AM, Jerry Rhee wrote: > > Spinoza’s chief work, the “Ethics”, is an exposition of the idea of the > absolute, with a monistic theory of the correspondence between mind and > matter, and applications to the philosophy of living. It is an

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Dear Gary, list: Alternatively, I would recommend examining what Peirce thought of Spinoza before we go down the road you suggest: Spinoza’s chief work, the “Ethics”, is an exposition of the idea of the absolute, with a monistic theory of the correspondence between mind and matter, and

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Jon, Edwina, List, I think that there are in fact several, perhaps many ways of being Christian, from more exoteric, traditional positions (doctrinaire, dogmatic, Bible centered, etc.) to those considerably less so, that is, more esoteric positions (mystical in, for example, the tradition of

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Edwina, List: If we presuppose that all religions are purely human constructs, then your approach makes perfect sense. On the other hand, if we take seriously the hypothesis that Jesus is God Himself in human flesh--not a mere "mortal born of gods"--then we will obviously proceed very

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

ct: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology) Gary, Helmut, List: I think that questions of religion come after the kinds of cosmological questions that we have been addressing lately. Once we establish the necessity of God's Reality for the existence of our univer

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

I think John who wrote of God as the Word can be helpful in relation to this subject. Peirce was no stranger to the idea that we talk to one within us. If one surmises that this is not an uncommon phenomenon and is itself worth investigation one might also surmise that whoever God is remains a

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Helmut, List, Thanks for this, Helmut. When I was studying comparative and inter-religion for about a decade a couple of decades ago, I found the distinction 'esoteric' vs 'exoteric' of help, for example, in such a discussion as we're having. Your pointing to what some scholars refer to as the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark, list, Clark wrote: The more I think on it the more my own view is that Peirce’s process approach to epistemology offers the best solution. Our beliefs are not volitional. All we can do is inquire. If we really inquire carefully and still believe, well that seems a good basis from which to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 28, 2016, at 2:17 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote: > > Thank you, Clark, for this nutshell summary of God-concepts since the Greek > abstraction. After I wrote it I worried I’d come off as being patronizing as I know many here knew all this. I just put it in that form

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark, list: “Your statement is absolutely unhistoric. To explain what I mean by this term, I will ask you one question: What is the Greek word for religion?” c.f. 50:25 - 54:10 in: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KQ_U9Nt3YE Leo Strauss: Jerusalem and Athens (1/2: 'Agreement')

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 27, 2016, at 10:29 AM, Helmut Raulien wrote: > > I guess that the question whether there is God or not leads to the assumtion > that there is God: Given that there is no God, everything has evolved by > itself, but this self-creation requires a mechanism, which is

Aw: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

qualifications'. [my emphasis].   Edwina - Original Message ----- From: Jon Alan Schmidt To: Edwina Taborsky Cc: Helmut Raulien ; cl...@lextek.com ; Peirce-L Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 2:49 PM Subject: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 26, 2016, at 12:23 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > CG: They don’t have 8 up on their web page for purchase yet. > > Which web page? It was published way back in 2009, and may be purchased > directly from IUP at >

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

ble > to *await positive evidence* before we complicate our acknowledgment with > qualifications'. [my emphasis]. > > Edwina > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> > *To:* Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> > *Cc:* H

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

49 PM Subject: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology) Edwina, List: ET: The universe is, after all, a physico-chemical existentiality, as Helmut points out. And this is a matter of fact, which therefore (according to Peirce) calls for an explanation.

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Edwina, List: ET: The universe is, after all, a physico-chemical existentiality, as Helmut points out. And this is a matter of fact, which therefore (according to Peirce) calls for an explanation. Why is there (now) something, rather than (still) nothing? ET: It is almost impossible to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark: CG: They don’t have 8 up on their web page for purchase yet. Which web page? It was published way back in 2009, and may be purchased directly from IUP at http://www.iupress.indiana. edu/product_info.php?products_id=207993. It is also on Amazon at

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 26, 2016, at 11:56 AM, Clark Goble wrote: > > Just perhaps with quite the genealogical mythic etymology that besets > Heideggers and others in that particular phenomenological tradition. Sorry autocorrect was not my friend. I should have proof read that before

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 26, 2016, at 10:01 AM, Helmut Raulien wrote: > > I am wondering, whether it is helpful at all to ponder about "nothing", > because I doubt that it can be more than a myth. Same with beginning, > creation, tychism, and platonic ideas. I have the hypothesis, that >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 26, 2016, at 7:42 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > Actually, seven volumes of the Writings have been published (1-6 and 8), now > extending through July 1892. As I understand it, work is currently in > progress on three additional volumes. > W7 will

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

, 2016 12:01 PM Subject: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology) List, I am wondering, whether it is helpful at all to ponder about "nothing", because I doubt that it can be more than a myth. Same with beginning, creation, tychism, and platonic ide

Aw: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Jon, list, So my hypothesis should not become a dogma. Could it at least serve for counter-hypothesis, preventing the hypothesis of a nothing from becoming a dogma? Though we are not in a courtroom, where the best method, if you are sued, is to sue back somehow. Oops, I might have gone on a path

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Helmut, List: My guess is that Peirce would say that the existence of the universe is a matter of fact, and thus calls for an explanation; so we should not block the way of inquiry by ruling this out on *a priori* grounds, as you seem to be suggesting. However, he also would say that we should

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

List, I am wondering, whether it is helpful at all to ponder about "nothing", because I doubt that it can be more than a myth. Same with beginning, creation, tychism, and platonic ideas. I have the hypothesis, that reverse-engineering is not possible if you only have the status quo, and no

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark, List: Actually, seven volumes of the Writings have been published (1-6 and 8), now extending through July 1892. As I understand it, work is currently in progress on three additional volumes. - W7 will include all of Peirce's contributions to the *Century Dictionary*, spanning from

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Dear Clark, list: Well, perhaps it can happen faster if they get some more funding as Peirce's popularity and awareness of his contribution grows. Best, Jerry Rhee On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:11 PM, CLARK GOBLE wrote: > > On Oct 25, 2016, at 2:38 PM, Jerry Rhee

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Dear list: Then for what reason is CP if it is simply an "arbitrarily jumbled topical arrangement of the Collected Papers"? To arrange papers with solely that purpose appears silly to me. Perhaps something is being missed or ignored. For example, what if our purpose is to find a resolution to a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 25, 2016, at 11:53 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > CG: I usually prefer to quote from EP 2 or RLT rather than CP for reasons > like this. (It’s just a pain to figure out the dates - although perhaps > that’s me) > > It is not just you--I have come to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark, List: CG: I usually prefer to quote from EP 2 or RLT rather than CP for reasons like this. (It’s just a pain to figure out the dates - although perhaps that’s me) It is not just you--I have come to despise not only the arbitrarily jumbled topical arrangement of the Collected Papers, but

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 25, 2016, at 10:00 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > CP 6.185-213 is the manuscript text for the eighth and final Cambridge > Conferences lecture and actually dates from 1898, not 1892-1893--thus coming > after Peirce became a full-blown three-category

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark, List: For convenience, here is what I posted in the previous thread on Peirce's Cosmology about this passage, prompted by the similar illustration of a mark on a blackboard in an earlier lecture of the same series. Is there a plausible way to integrate the two mentions of a blackboard

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark, List: CP 6.185-213 is the manuscript text for the eighth and final Cambridge Conferences lecture and actually dates from 1898, not 1892-1893--thus coming *after* Peirce became a full-blown three-category realist, according to Fisch. The PDF that you linked is how it appears in the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 25, 2016, at 9:43 AM, Clark Goble wrote: > > I’m slowly working through the posts I missed. Allow me to repost the > relevant quote. This is 6.202-209. I think you quoted the paragraph referring > to platonism. (See the other quotes at the bottom of this post too

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 24, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > Clark, List: > > At this point, it seems appropriate to shift this conversation to the > spin-off thread that I started last week based on Ben Novak's post and the > ones to which he was responding,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Clark, List: CG: I do hope you’ll comment on the Kantian point I raised. I’m curious as to your thoughts there. Are you referring to your last post in the thread on Peirce's Logical Universes and Categories? I am not very well-versed on Kant, so unfortunately I am not equipped to respond to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

> On Oct 24, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > At this point, it seems appropriate to shift this conversation to the > spin-off thread that I started last week based on Ben Novak's post and the > ones to which he was responding, which I have

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

Dear list: Here is an explanation of the last post. 61. Modern methods have created modern science; and this century, and especially the last twenty-five years, have done more to create new methods than any former equal period. We live in the very age of methods. Even mathematics and astronomy

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Metaphysics and Nothing (was Peirce's Cosmology)

https://outlivinglife.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/information_hose.jpg Best, Jerry R On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote: > Ben, List: > > Thank you for sharing these comments. I will need to take a look at the > text of Heidegger's speech, and

<    1   2