May 2012 13:12:22 -0400
From: ianel...@iupui.edu
To: jimwillgo...@msn.com
CC: peirce-l@listserv.iupui.edu
Subject: RE: [peirce-l] Not Preserving Peirce
Jim Willgoose wrote:
...The Studies in Logic would not lose its relevance then as
potential topics for philosophy classes, although
Subject: RE: [peirce-l] Not Preserving Peirce
To: ianel...@iupui.edu
Thank you Irving. The Studies in Logic would not lose its relevance
then as potential topics for philosophy classes, although the
symbolic portion would be eclipsed by the Fregean Revolution. For
example, Bode could have
An addendum: Many Poles besides Tarski wrote about logic. A book or three have
been written on the subject of Polish studies of logic between the WW.
-
You are receiving this
the older
Boole-Peirce-Schröder tradition.
- Message from johnphilipda...@hotmail.com -
Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 15:42:07 -0400
From: Jack Rooney johnphilipda...@hotmail.com
Reply-To: Jack Rooney johnphilipda...@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: [peirce-l] Not Preserving Peirce
To: Irving H
-
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 14:41:18 -0500
From: Jim Willgoose jimwillgo...@msn.com
Reply-To: Jim Willgoose jimwillgo...@msn.com
Subject: RE: [peirce-l] Not Preserving Peirce
To: ianel...@iupui.edu, peirce-l@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Irving and Jon; I wonder if the Studies in Logic did
to the question you had in mind.
- Message from jimwillgo...@msn.com -
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 14:41:18 -0500
From: Jim Willgoose jimwillgo...@msn.com
Reply-To: Jim Willgoose jimwillgo...@msn.com
Subject: RE: [peirce-l] Not Preserving Peirce
To: ianel...@iupui.edu, peirce-l
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
sufficient time had passed could
the book be retrieved for historical and philosophical interest. Of course,
there is always the nefarious possibility of an 'institutional apriori
authority having its way. Jim W
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 11:48:14 -0400
From: ianel...@iupui.edu
Subject: Re: [peirce-l
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
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.
14 matches
Mail list logo
