Diane, Steven, Jon: I have tried, but I am not yet happy with these trichotomies concerning time. However, should ordinary linear time sequencing rather than tenseless earlier/later relations (so called B-series) be the pivot for their conception, then, perhaps, actual indexicality (Secondness) and modality (possible Firstness and possible Thirdness) should be paramount:
First: may be -now- this/that Second is -now- this/that Third would be -now/then- this/that Best to you, Eduardo Forastieri-Braschi On 3/15/12 9:26 AM, "Jon Awbrey" <jawb...@att.net> wrote: > Steven, > > I think the point about sequentiality is correct. > > Relations are ordered according to their arities or dimensions, > and Peirce holds that three are enough to generate all others, > but not all relations of constraint or determination, that is, > information, are causal or temporal in nature, not even if we > try to imagine some order of triadic causality or temporality. > > Attempting to understand the relational categories by setting out ordered > lists > of terms that are regarded as naming absolute, monadic, non-relational > essences > is a sign that our understanding has gone off track and fallen into yet > another > rut of reductionism. I don't know what to call it -- absolutism? monadicism? > non-relativism? -- but it's just as bad a form of reductionism as nominalism. > > Regards, > > Jon > > Steven Ericsson-Zenith wrote: >> Dear Diane, >> >> I agree with those that question whether Peirce would be comfortable using >> notions of linear time, as Jon's quote highlights. >> >> In the context of time conceptions (for me, time is simply a way of speaking) >> I would prefer: >> >> 1st = the immediate experience >> 2nd = the accessible record >> 3rd = the manifold of unity >> >> In brief: immediacy, record, unification. >> >> It would be important for me to observe that no sequential nature should be >> read into the process suggested by these categories, they covary in what I >> would call "the eternal moment." The conception of time is a product of the >> unifying effect of what Peirce calls "thirdness." >> >> With respect, >> Steven >> >> >> -- >> Dr. Steven Ericsson-Zenith >> Institute for Advanced Science & Engineering >> http://iase.info >> >> On Mar 14, 2012, at 8:56 AM, Diane Stephens wrote: >> >>> In the book Semiotics I by Donald Thomas, he includes a chart which shows >>> concepts associated with firsts, seconds and thirds. For example, a first >>> is quality, a second is fact and a third is law. I understand all but >>> second as past as in: >>> >>> First - present >>> Second - past >>> Third - future >>> >>> I would appreciate some help. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Diane Stephens >>> Swearingen Chair of Education >>> Wardlaw 255 >>> College of Education >>> University of South Carolina >>> Columbia, SC 29208 >>> 803-777-0502 >>> Fax 803-777-3193 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the message. To post a message to the list, send it to PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
