Despite all this there are several books on the history of logic eg Kneale
Kneale[?].
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 18:24:51 -0400
From: ianel...@iupui.edu
Subject: [peirce-l]
To: PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
As an addendum to Nathan Houser's The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the
Peirce Papers,
Jack,
All histories of logic written that I've read so far are very weak on Peirce,
and I think it's fair to say that even the few that make an attempt to cover
his work have fallen into the assimilationist vein.
Regards,
Jon
Jack Rooney wrote:
Despite all this there are several books on the
Jon,
I couldn't have said it better myself!
Kneale Kneale, to which Jack referred, was originally written in the
late 1950s and published in 1962, and in terms of respective
significance pays more attention to Kant even than to Frege, and is
best, thanks to Martha Kneale's expertise, on the
picky, picky, picky ;)
-
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L
listserv. To remove yourself from this list, send a message to
Irving and Jon; I wonder if the Studies in Logic did not suffer, in part,
from a retrospective lack of unity. In other words, from the vantage point of
1950, the various topics (quantification, induction, Epicurus etc.) did not fit
the 20th century development of a more narrow-grained
I have often thought his 'Amazing Mazes' would make great posters. Wonder if
Harvard would ever consider that?
From: Jack Rooney johnphilipda...@hotmail.com
To: PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [peirce-l] Not
Isn't there someone who could assemble from the many good contributions to
the list a short book designed for reading beyond academe that would be
aimed at rectifying each area in which Peirce has unrecognized prominence,
importance, panache, whatever? I am sure the answer is yes. It could even
A very good idea, Stephen! - Though I think quite many problems will arise with
such an enterprise. For one thing the wealth of such contributions through the
history of the list. And how to select amongst them?
You presented two criteria. Unrecognized areas of prominence etc in Peirce, for
Hi Kirsti - I think what I was really thinking of was things where there is
a sense of clear injustice - where Peirce is the origin who gets little or
no credit or has been the victim of theft or suppression. Also what
Peirce's influence has created already and what it might create in the
future.
