Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Realism and Idealism

I meant Nietzsche went mad hugging the horse. amazon.com/author/stephenrose On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 12:51 PM Stephen Curtiss Rose wrote: > I am very glad you are bringing this down to earth. You are right to flag > evil and injustice. Neither is the strong suit of academic philosophy. > Sadly

Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Realism and Idealism

I am very glad you are bringing this down to earth. You are right to flag evil and injustice. Neither is the strong suit of academic philosophy. Sadly I could "out" Peirce and Wittgenstein, neither of whom were without filmclips that would make them worse than Nietzsche who after all went man

Aw: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Realism and Idealism

I agree, but before everybody can pursue beauty, truth, and enlightenment, everybody should be granted to have a life. Some days ago, a participant of the education outfit I work in has been expelled with her family from Germany to Montenegro. She neither has a german, nor a montenegronian

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Realism and Idealism

I am gratified at this understanding which indicates to me the relevance of the triadic approach. I am still a babe in the woods regarding this thinking though I know how it started. At this point if I had a large pedestal I would make room on it for Peirce, Berkeley, Wittgenstein and Nietzsche

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Realism and Idealism

I see. In your post you also spoke of information as the basic stuff of the universe. So perhaps "spirit (or mind) - matter - information" might be seen as a triad? To see matter-mind as a dyad brings a bout the hen-and-egg-problem, as realists see matter as primordinal, and mind as its

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Realism and Idealism

Realism appears to me to the basis of dominant science -- deriving truth from material. Idealism rejects that. If opposition is conceded they form a binary that triadic thinking questions (perhaps as you do). But my conclusion would be to try to see what unifies them and what if anything would

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy and Pragmaticism

Stephen, List: Thanks for the reminder. Was there something specific that prompted you to post it at this time? Do you think that some of us are guilty of failing to maintain that distinction in some of our own posts? Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

I think this is a wonderful bouquet. Hopefully also the others will appreciate it. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 4, 2016, at 2:57 PM, Stephen C. Rose wrote: > > This is the intro to an attempt to articulate what I have been working on. It > is clearly not germane but Gary

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Works in All Contexts

Stephen, I very good & most relevant quote you provided. Kirsti Stephen C. Rose kirjoitti 3.7.2016 15:00: The reasoning of Triadic Philosophy works in all contexts. This is a remarkable claim in a world where the barriers between disciplines grow higher and it is hard to have discussions

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign

views are not able to do the job. The informational and the info-computational do not. Søren Fra: John Collier [mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za] Sendt: 30. december 2015 11:01 Til: Søren Brier; Stephen C. Rose; Peirce List Emne: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign Søren, I

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign

irce List Emne: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign Yes. We’ve discussed this before here. We disagree on the usefulness of phenomenology and hermeneutics for dealing with the problem. I also think that he informational approach by itself is insufficient. I think we need to understand the dyna

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign

s. I would really like to have papers on this to > Cybernetics & Human Knowing. A special issue if there are several that want > to attempt this difficult area. > > > > Best > > Søren > > > > *Fra:* John Collier [mailto:colli...@ukzn.a

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign

in the attached article from Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology. Am I wrong? Best Søren Fra: John Collier [mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za] Sendt: 29. december 2015 04:13 Til: Stephen C. Rose; Peirce List Emne: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign Stephen, List

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign

s it, as I have done in the > attached article from *Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology*. Am > I wrong? > > > > Best > > Søren > > > > > > *Fra:* John Collier [mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za <colli...@ukzn.ac.za>] > *S

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign

eveloped over his life. One of the more obvious is > Barbieri’s codebiology, but he is so honest and explicit in his > argumentation that it is possible to discuss it, as I have done in the > attached article from *Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology*. Am > I wrong? > > >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy -- Sign

Thanks John. Your mention of Deacon is pleasing because I have admired his work. The dicsign business I see as a sort of look under the hood and saying hey this works and what makes it work is this thingy over here. My work with Peirce suggests that he too agonized over the entirety of what he was

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Jesus and the Pragmatic Maxim

Very interesting explorations by Stephen Rose and Stephen Jarosek. On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Stephen Jarosek sjaro...@iinet.net.au wrote: [image: Boxbe] https://www.boxbe.com/overview Stephen Jarosek ( sjaro...@iinet.net.au) is not on your Guest List

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Jesus and the Pragmatic Maxim

Stephen, I have been doing some research recently on Buddhism... while I have always respected Buddhism as rational and sensible, as I review it from a Peircean angle, it occurs to me that we would do well to try to reframe Peirce's semiotics from a Buddhist perspective or explore Buddhism from a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Jesus and the Pragmatic Maxim

Hi Stephen...I think you're better schooled than I on these connections. I think Peirce is relevant universally without being explicitly tied to anything. When he gets tied it seems folk get involved in telling others what Peirce meant by this and that. I can imagine what this might be like to

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Jesus and the Pragmatic Maxim

Dear Stephen, Stephen, List, Stephen C. Rose, I like your poem very much. I think, that The heart is new means, that it is reconnected to something very old, namely to a universal principle, like the term religion means reconnection. It is also new, because it (the new heart) newly is letting go

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - The Answer to Ex Nihilo

Nice :-) On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Stephen C. Rose stever...@gmail.com wrote: The answer to ex nihilo is not that hard to find First scuttle all our disciplines Yes leave them all behind Next think about it for a while you're bound to think of something Wait I just did it esto

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Getting There

Is possible. I am working un it un three ways: history un general, art history and lógic of discovery engineering. The last topic was the subject of muy paper at the centenial congresos. Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2015 14:52:18 -0500 From: stever...@gmail.com To: Peirce-L@list.iupui.edu Subject:

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Meta and Index

Edwina, lists, Ew: 3) Your assertion that Peirce is 'not the only scholar of signs' is yet another empty and specious argument, Sung: So am I right to assume then that you think Peirce is the only important scholar of signs and hence reading him is all you need to understand what a sign is ?

Re: [biosemiotics:7906] Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Meta and Index

:* Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:40 PM *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Meta and Index Edwina, lists, Ew: 3) Your assertion that Peirce is 'not the only scholar of signs' is yet another empty and specious argument, Sung: So am I right to assume then that you think Peirce

Re: [biosemiotics:7906] Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Meta and Index

- Original Message - *From:* Sungchul Ji s...@rci.rutgers.edu *To:* biosemiotics biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee ; PEIRCE-L peirce-l@list.iupui.edu *Sent:* Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:40 PM *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Meta and Index Edwina, lists, Ew: 3) Your assertion

Re: [biosemiotics:7906] Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Meta and Index

'discussion'. Edwina - Original Message - From: Sungchul Ji To: biosemiotics ; PEIRCE-L Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 8:22 PM Subject: [biosemiotics:7906] Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Meta and Index Edwina, I agree with Peirce that we think in signs. Since

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Is Triadic Thinking Conscious?

I think Peirce felt we feel our way to the truth, all the way from the tiny metaphors of symbolic process thru the big metaphors we construct conciously. Freedom of choice comes in thru imagination, which I don't think Peirce addressed much, but we can still feel our various imaginings, pick the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Is Triadic Thinking Conscious?

I will ponder that. My own sense is that whatever Peirce may have meant his triadic structure functions consciously to generate expressions and actions that would not exist were the process binary, allowing only for an either or and or. It seems to me that however a sign is generated it is not a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Binary Discourse

Stephen - 'binary discourse', as differentiated from 'binary logic', which is quite valid, eg, either-or modesdoes indeed have its problems. I find that some people find it difficult to argue about the issue, and instead, resort to fallacious argumentation tactics (ad hominem, ad populum,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Sorting Us Out

Stephen, List:Peirce says somewhere else that the poet and the physicist have much in common. This quote seems to sever those who create art from those who strive to penetrate the cosmos. But that is a fundamental misunderstanding of what art is (including music and poetry), and what what might be

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Continuity Continued

The main reason I prefer my triad is that I believe philosophy has given short shrift to ethics and aesthetics in addition to closeting itself in academe - hardly its fault but the result is a disaster given the present low estate of public discourse. Also it avoids binary oppositions. Books

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Arisbe

Maybe you're talking about Joe Ransdell's FAQ Who Is Charles Peirce? http://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/faqs/whoiscsp.HTM http://www.iupui.edu/%7Earisbe/faqs/whoiscsp.HTM Best, Ben On 11/16/2014 8:59 PM, Stephen C. Rose wrote: (Arisbe) Charles Sanders Peirce: ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY: Home Page

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy - Continuity

Stephen, I agree. Best, Kirsti Stephen C. Rose [stever...@gmail.com] kirjoitti: Seeing continuity non-mathematically, is it not the sense of the universal motion itself - of chronology taking place in a way that we can say, Yes, we are part of that. A continuum might relate to something

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

List I think fallibilism, triadic logic (although I prefer call it Trinitary logic) and the doctrine of continuity, represents the foundation of Peircean doctrine. With these concepts we can write a story so that the past is understandable without recourse to metaphysical concepts

Aw: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

Gesendet:Donnerstag, 18. September 2014 um 22:28 Uhr Von:Stephen C. Rose stever...@gmail.com An:Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de Cc:Peirce List peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Betreff:Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Hi Helmut - I am afraid that there is much in your emendation with which I am either at sea (do

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

On Sep 21, 2014, at 9:17 PM, Clark Goble cl...@libertypages.com wrote: On Sep 18, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Stephen C. Rose stever...@gmail.com mailto:stever...@gmail.com wrote: 2) Which of Peirce’s writings contribute to the development and articulation of his late value theory?

Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

. So far, Best, Helmut *Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 18. September 2014 um 22:28 Uhr *Von:* Stephen C. Rose stever...@gmail.com *An:* Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de *Cc:* Peirce List peirce-l@list.iupui.edu *Betreff:* Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Hi Helmut - I am afraid

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

Stephen, All, Sorry, on a 1 dot wifi so hard to chase links, but I always thought aesthetics, ethics, logic as normative sciences whose objects are beauty, goodness (arête), truth, respectively, was a classical notion? Jon http://inquiryintoinquiry.com On Sep 18, 2014, at 1:02 PM, Stephen

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

The text is a quote Jon not my own thinking. To me beauty and truth are ultimately one as Keats proposes. Ethics in my triad is a second (index) through which a sign passes on its way to being translated into an expression or action or both. I reverse CP's order and name the third aesthetics.

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy

Peirce-L@list.iupui.edu *Betreff:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy The text is a quote Jon not my own thinking. To me beauty and truth are ultimately one as Keats proposes. Ethics in my triad is a second (index) through which a sign passes on its way to being translated into an expression

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

19. Triadic Philosophy is about more than thinking in threes. It is also about adopting a daily discipline. If you are not inclined to devote a half hour a day to walking or some modest physical movement and if you are not willing to give a daily regimen a try, then the chances of benefit

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

I am not sure what you are saying. Non-idolatry in my view is the supreme value of all and underlies all other good values. This means it can modify, condition, adjust, trump or accentuate one's consideration. If you mean that is the strong conclusion. The premise as I read it is that time has

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Jarosek sjaro...@iinet.net.au wrote: Hungary... All the best from Budapest! *From:* Stephen C. Rose [mailto:stever...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Saturday, 21 June 2014 6:17 PM *To:* Stephen Jarosek *Subject:* Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction Netflix beats tv in many ways

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

*To:* Stephen Jarosek *Subject:* Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction Netflix beats tv in many ways. Now hu I have to look up. Cheers, S *@stephencrose https://twitter.com/stephencrose* On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Stephen Jarosek sjaro...@iinet.net.au wrote: Yes, from

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

*Subject:* Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction Netflix beats tv in many ways. Now hu I have to look up. Cheers, S *@stephencrose https://twitter.com/stephencrose* On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Stephen Jarosek sjaro...@iinet.net.au wrote: Yes, from au

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction Meaning of Aesthetics as a Term?

Steven, List: On Jun 20, 2014, at 12:43 PM, Stephen C. Rose wrote: If Triadic Philosophy has any claim to originality it might be in the third term in its root triad which is Aesthetics. A critical comment, if I may... At a deep level, the origins and the dictionary meanings of words are

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction Meaning of Aesthetics as a Term?

I most appreciate your reply and exposition of the past meanings and your questions. I am going to answer the final one and see where this goes. Triadic Philosophy is rooted in three interdependent terms. Without the three in the order they have there is no substance to it. The three terms Reality

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

9. What then is thinking in threes? On one level it is a means of preventing conflict from coming to a head. If two objects are busily colliding, it helps to have a third option. It can even be suggested that our minds are triadic, they can spin out conclusions indefinitely. And three is the

RE: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

) of those that they keep company with... and they go on to infect those (culture) that they rule over. From: Stephen C. Rose [mailto:stever...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 21 June 2014 2:56 PM To: Peirce List Subject: Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction 9. What

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

, 21 June 2014 2:56 PM *To:* Peirce List *Subject:* Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction 9. What then is thinking in threes? On one level it is a means of preventing conflict from coming to a head. If two objects are busily colliding, it helps to have a third option

RE: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, 21 June 2014 5:53 PM To: Stephen Jarosek; Peirce List Subject: Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction I much appreciate your comment that in reference to the subject of this thread. What I gather is a good respect for the utility of threes without

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

List, Matt: Thank you for articulating your views. I was somewhat stunned by the notion that the First person pronoun, a simple term of reference from grammar would lead to so many broad philosophical generalizations. To me, your post illustrates a clear example of a relation between

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

I don't see how anyone can avoid choosing, either consciously or subconsciously, either monism or dualism. You can switch, but I don't see a way out. I'm not sure if there's a real philosophical difference between the two monistic philosophies or if one is just a more convenient view from

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

7. If Triadic Philosophy has any claim to originality it might be in the third term in its root triad which is Aesthetics. What in heaven's name is aesthetics doing in what bids to be the upper limit of a universal philosophy that will create a sea change in our troubled earth? The simple answer

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

I dont think, that materialism and idealism are monisms, but, that monism is a hypothesis, that says, that both, ideas and matter, are derivates of the same thing (genotype or so), of which none is more fundamental than the other. What makes them different derivates on one hand, and combines them

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Matt wrote: Just like 'standing still' is a special case of (062014-1) motion, matter is a special case of mind. Do you mean by (062014-1) that Matter is a necessary condition for mind ? Would you agree that Just as 'standing still' is assocaited with a zero(062014-2)

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Hi Sung, On Jun 20, 2014, at 6:34 PM, Sungchul Ji s...@rci.rutgers.edu wrote: Matt wrote: Just like 'standing still' is a special case of (062014-1) motion, matter is a special case of mind. Do you mean by (062014-1) that Matter is a necessary condition for mind ? I didn't

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Stephen, Our evolution can be understood as having a direction without the belief that it will or can reach an end. We might be heading asymptotically toward that end. It occurred to me that you might not be using the term realism in the way Peirce did. He used the term as it's mostly used in

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Where does the word realism come in? In Law of Mind Peirce describes his synechistic philosophy as follows: first a logical realism of the most pronounced type; second, objective idealism; third, tychism, with its consequent thoroughgoing evolutionism. While I have indeed seen pragmaticism as

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Here's the sixth aphorism. We are almost to the point of articulating the root of Triadic Philosophy. As you might expect, it has to do with the number three. A triad is the sum of 1 and 2, a monad and a dyad. There is magic in this, almost enough to make it transparent that the triadic is the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Jerry asked, What is your understanding of your usage of the term us in your sentence? Could you find a better articulation of your intended meaning(s)? My usage was in response to what Stephen said, quoted here: Pragmaticism is a bastion against the dominant notion that we are all

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

C. S. Peirce said [EP2:258] , Whenever we set out to do anything we ‘go upon’, we base our conduct on facts already known. He adds that our conduct can only rise from memory when our investigations have been made and reduced to a memorial maxim.” Although I have operated, along with all manner

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Jerry, I think my answer is important. I'm working on it. I just need a few days. Matt On Jun 15, 2014, at 2:12 PM, Jerry LR Chandler jerry_lr_chand...@me.com wrote: Matt: It is a question of the relation between your usage of the term us and how I understood your sentence. My

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

But scientific facts are not in opposition to triadic philosophy since its practice issues in measurable results in the form of expressions and actions. *@stephencrose https://twitter.com/stephencrose* On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Jerry LR Chandler jerry_lr_chand...@me.com wrote: Matt:

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Stephen: On Jun 15, 2014, at 6:10 AM, Stephen C. Rose wrote: But scientific facts are not in opposition to triadic philosophy since its practice issues in measurable results in the form of expressions and actions. Matt had posted the following: The Buddhist logicians Dignaga and

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

I am not part of this immediate discussion but I think the problem is that initially the statement suggested a temporal beginning and end and this declension suggests something much more general and to be more acceptable and demonstrable reality. The notion that mind is inherent in reality seems

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Matt, as I amateurishly understand it, a gravitational field is an accelerational field, so a distant observer outside of it and at rest with respect to it will see the clocks there ticking more slowly (time dilation) than the observer's own. On the other hand, if you were orbiting a planet

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Stephen, It appeared to me that you had hijacked the term pragmaticism, and I still think you might have. Peirce was an idealist, and the idea that 'we are reality,' if we means those of us whose essence is our mind, is a cornerstone of pragmaticism. In this sense there never was a reality

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Triadic Philosophy Introduction

Matt: Scientific facts are in opposition to your conclusion. Cheers jerry On Jun 14, 2014, at 5:11 PM, Matt Faunce wrote: Stephen, It appeared to me that you had hijacked the term pragmaticism, and I still think you might have. Peirce was an idealist, and the idea that 'we are reality,'