Thank you for posting your thoughts on this, Michael!
How does the concept of style which you elaborate below relate to Peirce's
distinction of 'tone' from 'token' and 'type'?
Cheers, Cathy
-Original Message-
From: C S Peirce discussion list [mailto:PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU] On
Gary R wrote:
*
For my own part, I tend--as perhaps Jon does as well--to see
esthetic/ethics/logic as semeiotic as being in genuine tricategorial
relation so that they *inform* each other in interesting ways. Trichotomic
vector theory, then, does not demand that one necessarily always follow
the
That is a very rich reply, Gene, thank you.
You write:
”The problem of modern idealization involves what Max Weber called
rationalization, but it also involves the colonization of the sentiments by
idealizing rationality, in effect, disabling the spontaneous self and its
spontaneous
I can confirm that last bit about the difficulty of explaining these
concepts, though I do so as a Deweyan always wondering exactly how did he
borrow and deviate from Peirce's concepts. I do hear a number of people
say that they like Peirce, but it is never clear to what they are
referring. That
I said this wrong. Changed below between pairs of asterisks. Sorry! - Best, Ben
- Original Message -
Jason, list,
That's interesting. What aspects of synechism do they reject?
a.. Continuity of space and time? Lorentz symmetries seem to make such
continuity pretty credible.
b..
Ben and list,
In part it is a reflection of what I like to talk about, but they tend to
reject a variant of your fourth bullet point, especially either the direct
or indirect implications of Four Incapacities, Consequences of Four
Incapacities, and the continuity of inference and semiotic.
