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

2014-06-14 Thread Helmut Raulien
Gesendet:Samstag, 14. Juni 2014 um 00:06 Uhr Von:Gary Richmond gary.richm...@gmail.com An:Gary Moore gottlos752...@yahoo.com Cc:Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de, Peirce-L peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Betreff:Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Triadic Philosophy Introduction Gary M., list, I agree that Aufheben

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

2014-06-14 Thread Jerry LR Chandler
Stephen, List: On Jun 13, 2014, at 12:06 PM, Stephen C. Rose wrote: The first premise I start with is that we do think in threes, First, I observe the fact that this phrase is expressed in English grammar, a form of communication rooted in expressing meaning as sounds. As stated, it asserts

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

2014-06-14 Thread Stephen C. Rose
Thanks Jerry. Here goes: We in my writing generally refers to all people. Since I do not believe anyone should do anything that is not his or her choice, my statement that we do think in threes is an assumption not an instruction. My reasons for coming to this are frankly the fruit of my

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

2014-06-14 Thread Helmut Raulien
is the combining structure. Best, Helmut Gesendet:Samstag, 14. Juni 2014 um 00:06 Uhr Von:Gary Richmond gary.richm...@gmail.com An:Gary Moore gottlos752...@yahoo.com Cc:Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de, Peirce-L peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Betreff:Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Triadic Philosophy Introduction Gary M

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Triadic Philosophy Introduction

2014-06-13 Thread Stephen C. Rose
Can I assume that everyone agrees? Doubtful. Certainly the contention that there are universal values is noit settled. Likewise is there is a such a thing as conscious (intentional) thought? And is there an inherent value in thinking threes? What is a reasonable root triad for such? Lots of

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

2014-06-13 Thread Gary Fuhrman
a semiotic or phaneroscopic triad as in Peirce?) gary f. From: Stephen C. Rose [mailto:stever...@gmail.com] Sent: 13-Jun-14 9:57 AM To: Peirce List Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Triadic Philosophy Introduction Can I assume that everyone agrees? Doubtful. Certainly the contention

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

2014-06-13 Thread Gary Moore
PARTIAL PROVIONAL ANSWERS SR: Can I assume that everyone agrees? Doubtful. -x- GCM: Everyone agrees that we can carry on a dialogue (except for those who do not respond) which at least sets up a dialectical schema. -x- SR: Certainly the contention that there are universal values is not settled.

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

2014-06-13 Thread Stephen C. Rose
Gary M. Thanks for your response. I assume there will be little agreement though there may well be much said that can contribute to the goal of Triadic Philosophy which is to propound a universally applicable mode of thinking that leads to good expressions and actions. The premise of Triadic

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

2014-06-13 Thread Stephen C. Rose
Date: Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:38 AM Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Triadic Philosophy Introduction To: Peirce List Peirce-L@list.iupui.edu Stephen, can you say a bit more about what a reasonable root triad for your philosophy would look like? I assume it's not Object-Sign-Interpretant

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

2014-06-13 Thread Helmut Raulien
Peirce-L@list.iupui.edu, Gary Fuhrman g...@gnusystems.ca Betreff:Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Triadic Philosophy Introduction Dear Gary F. For some reason my reply to your post did not find its way to the list. Here it is again. My apologies. The first premise I start with is that we do think in threes