Joe, Bernard, Wilfred, list,
_Magno cum grano salis_ it is, then. The content of the 10-chotomy on which I
got my paws is very suggestive, beginning with the sign's own phenomenological
category and ending with a trichotomy of _assurances_ of instinct, experience,
and form, i.e., as at an inqui
Ben, list,
You wrote:
Actually, the way I in which I checked was by
literally flipping Robert Marty's diagram around in PowerPoint
That is to say, by diagram manipulation and observation leading to
fresh insight, an abduction regarding relations--exactly what Peirce
sees as the value of diagra
Frances to listers...
As posited by Peirce under speculative grammatics, it is clear enough
to me that the classes of immediate object signs are qualisigns and
sinsigns and legisigns, and that the classes of dynamic object signs
are icons and indexes and symbols, and that the various interpretant
Ben, list,
By now you've received my completed and corrected message which omits
the request for the not-simplified lattice version of my trikonic
diagram of the 10 classes (since I very much like your simplified form
which I included in the revised message) and adds analytical content.
For ri
Joe, list,
I want to correct something in my last post which could cause
confusion. I wrote:
That Peirce apparently included this triangular
on the back of a letter
which included a very tentative presentation of his very different 10
trichotomies of signs has I think resulted in confusing tha
Gary:
Sorry for the confusion of the ten classes with
the ten trichotomies. I didn't read your message carefully enough. I
have no problem with that and there is no need to respond further to
it.
Joe
- Original Message -
From:
Gary
Richmond
To: Peirce Discussion F
Joe,
By now you've read my corrected and completed post so that I hope some
of what you asked is addressed in that corrected post. Just a point or
so more for now. You wrote:
Would you mind reposting the diagram you refer to below?
It is my trikonic diagram of the 10 classes of signs whi
Frances:
In view of what I was just now relating to Ben, I would have to regard the
sort of enterprise you speculate about below as a timewaster of monumental
proportions, promising to generate word salad that startle even the inmates
at Bedlam, given that it would be based on an unreliable und
Claudio, Ben, Robert, Bernard, Joe, list,
First, sorry for sending out that last incomplete message by mistake.
Claudio, so good to see you on the list again. I too am pleased to see
all the
diagrammatic discussion and especially some of Ben's abductions
relating diagrams (for example the one
Frances to listers...
The broad theme of this topic and its leading threads is a subject
that remains intriguingly foggy for me. At the core of my haze perhaps
is the forced application of categorics upon semiotics, yet with
synechastics lurking in the wings. In my attempt to wrestle with the
many
Gary:
Would you mind reposting the diagram you refer to below? I don't recall
what was said about that at that time but I think it important to get clear
on what can and cannot legitimately be imputed to Peirce, and the absence of
availability of the relevant MS material is important to bear i
Ben asks:
"My basic question here is whether these
structural relations are correct or whether the ordering of the trichotomies "I,
II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X" is correct."
REPLY:
The MS material in the logic notebook (MS 339)
shows quite clearly that Peirce did not regard hims
Claudio, Ben, Robert, Bernard, Joe, list,
Claudio, so goo to see you on list. I too am pleased to see all the
diagrammatic discussion and especially some of Ben's abductions relating
diagrams (one I believe he hasn't posted yet, but which I hope he will,
shows a possible correspondence between
Ben and list,
Professional duties don't let me time enough to enter now in this very
interesting discussion. Just some words: I think that the list of
divisions from I to X has to be ordered differently and may be that
several orderings are conceivable. This is something about which Peirce
sc
Various corrections. Sorry about that.
Also, anybody replying, please remember to delete all unneeded graphics and
text. - Ben
---
Gary R., Robert, Bernard, Wilfred, Claudio, List,
I thought I'd try to the branching style chart of Peirce's
ten-adic division of sign paramet
Gary R., Robert, Bernard, Wilfred, Claudio, List,
I thought I'd try to the branching style chart of Peirce's
ten-adic division of sign parameters. (These parameters are not mutually
independent). I supposed that the same formal relations applied as with the main
three trichotomies of parame
16 matches
Mail list logo
