Frances to Thomas and listers...
There may for many persons be some things that are outside the scope
and venue of objective semiotics or logic and not be prone as objects
of study to the laws of scientific belief, such as articles of
religious faith for example, but not for Peirce and his brand
Hello. This is my first post to this listserv. It was suggested
to me by my professor that people on this list might have some
input regarding a question I am starting to pursue, and that I
might consider sending out a message. So I am doing so.
I am examining Peirce's various statements and
Dear List,
There is a very nice and copyright free bio of Peirce from NOAA that I
have copied into Panopedia for reference here:
http://www.panopedia.org/index.php/Charles_Sanders_Peirce#NOAA_Giants_of_Science
The article is unattributed and makes the following claim, that Peirce
was:
"
Letter Peirce to Marquand, L 269, 30 December 1886 in W5, p.422,423
Thomas.
On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 21:30:30 +0100, Steven Ericsson Zenith
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear List,
There is a very nice and copyright free bio of Peirce from NOAA that I
have copied into Panopedia for reference
On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 17:14:53 +0100, Frances Kelly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To the extent
therefore that some consciousness is interpretable and translatable,
then it is all conceivably and probably an objective logical
construct. Indeed, all of subjectivity would then fall under this
Dear Steven,
In Ken Ketner's book "His Glassy Essence" it is
mentioned on page 196 that Peirce's brother, Ben "met Charles Babbage to discuss
mechanized computing"... For whatever that's worth. I believe
Ken Ketner is an electrical engineer as well as philosopher, biographer,
etc and may
Larry Sanger wrote:
This question--who authorizes the authorities--really lies at the heart of
social epistemology, and reminds me of an essay I read in grad school,
Egoism in Epistemology by Richard Foley (in *Socializing Epistemology*--I
just pulled the book off the shelf). Among other things
My thanks Thomas, can you please
clarify to which document "W5" refers.
Thanks,
Steven
Thomas Riese wrote:
Letter Peirce to Marquand, L 269, 30 December 1886 in W5, p.422,423
Thomas.
On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 21:30:30 +0100, Steven Ericsson ZenithÂ
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven:
Thomas is referring to Writings of
CSP, vol. 5. It contains a copy of a letter of Dec 30, 1886, of which
there is a copy (with an image of a page from it), to Allan Marquand in which
Peirce explains to Marquand how the electronic switch (the logic gate) would
work, with a simple
Sorry Steven, it's the Writings of Charles S. Peirce, A Chronological
Edition.
on page 422 Peirce gives a description and two drawings (for an AND and an
OR gate) together with the electrical batteries and all. On page 423 there
is a reproduction of the original manuscript page. The letter
Dear Ben,
thanks for your reply, I'll respond as soon as possible in detail. The
transitivity is not so much of an issue. I can explain that. Asymmetry then
isn't a problem either. The difficulty was, to find out what the true
(logical)
nature of quasi-periodicity is. I can show that Peirce's
11 matches
Mail list logo
