Thomas:Your thoughts on the potential relation between Peirce's continuity and mathematical history were fascinating. I must confess that I am a bit of a skeptic when it comes to the possibility of a sensible relation between logic, any logic, and a philosophy of mathematics.Nonetheless, I remain
Dear Gary / Kristi:On Apr 19, 2006, at 1:05 AM, Peirce Discussion Forum digest wrote:Dear Gary, I was quite delighted in reading what you wrote: The second law, as i understand it, says that any actual use of energy degrades it, i.e. reduces its quality or usefulness. In the jargon of
among individuals, species and genera.
It must provide a source of generative grammars, not merely genera.
Such is Life Itself.
Cheers
Jerry
Jerry LR Chandler
Research Professor
Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study
George Mason University
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber
Arnold:
On Apr 29, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Peirce Discussion Forum digest wrote:
In Vol IV
of the Collected Papers (and, I would guess, throughout the New
Elements of
Mathematics, a copy of Eisele's edition of which I would dearly
love to
get!) he goes to considerable lengths in exploring the
Jim:
On May 9, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Peirce Discussion Forum digest wrote:
Still this account leaves untouched the matter of symbols standing
for =
the meaning of objects. The indexical and iconic functions of
symbols =
tell us what meaning is being refered to but they do not shed any
light
much what's available to me.
Best, Ben Udell
- Original Message -=20
From: Jerry LR Chandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Peirce Discussion Forum peirce-l@lyris.ttu.edu
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 7:39 PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Re: NEW ELEMENTS: So what is it all about?
Ben:
My comment is from
of his most elevated and critical hour. [Thoreau]{
gnusystems }{ Pam Jackson Gary Fuhrman }{ Manitoulin University
}{ [EMAIL PROTECTED] }{ http://users.vianet.ca/gnox/ }{
Jerry LR Chandler
Research Professor
Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study
George Mason University
---
Message
On May 12, 2006, at 1:05 AM, Peirce Discussion Forum digest wrote:
Off-list, Gary Richmond, who's quite busy, sent me this:
66~~
Chemistry expresses itself in Peirce's valency theory (the term is
not his
but Ken Ketner's who hasn't been given enough credit yet for his
work in
can be abstracted
into beautifully constructed narratives that expand the domain of
discourse such the origins are fully and completely obscured?
Thanks again for posting the quote.
Cheers
Jerry LR Chandler
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
://arxiv.org/PS_cache/math/pdf/0603/0603590.pdf)
Irving H. Anellis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.peircepublishing.com
http://www.abebooks.com/home/PEIRCEPUBLISHING
--=20
Jerry LR Chandler
Research Professor
Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study
George Mason
.
Can someone untangle the intended communication?
=20
=20
Cheers
Jerry
=20
Jerry LR Chandler
Research Professor
Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study
George Mason University
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Ben / Jim:
Your ppt file is very imaginative!
Although I am uncertain of how much of it I understand, I enjoyed
looking at it and it brings several questions to mind.
In particular, I am curious about the intended meaning of slide 18.
Why C2H6 - e ?
Can you explain your understanding /
To List:
A number of recent posts have addressed the topics of:
On Jun 19, 2006, at 1:05 AM, Peirce Discussion Forum digest wrote:
Re: Sinsign, Legisign, Qualisign
I am seeking help in understanding the importance of these terms to
individual scholars.
The definitions are reasonably
various =
perspectives.
Cheers
Jerry
Jerry LR Chandler
Research Professor
Krasnow Institute for Advanced Study
George Mason University
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Patrick, Jean-Marc.
On Jun 28, 2006, at 7:27 AM, Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
Patrick Coppock wrote:
At 0:11 -0400 25-06-2006, Jerry LR Chandler wrote:
I will be at the Whitehead Conference in Salzburg next week so I
do not anticipate much time for replies.
...
However, for us to believe
Dear Patrick:A few quick notes from Salzburg as I found your comments of interest and perhaps I can clarify some issues.My goals are more concerned with a coherent philosophy of science, especially a coherent relation between chemical philosophy and biological philosophy and medical philosophy.
Dear Jim, Rob and List:Before turning to Jim's post, a couple of comments about the Salzburg conferences.The Whitehead conference attracted about three hundred (300!!) participants. The Chinese are keenly interested in Whitehead. It was rumored that they intend to establish 25 research
To the list:
In response to the query, the Whitehead Conference index is at
www.sbg.ac.at/whiteheadconference/index2.html
It should be noted that I tried to access the site before composing this post
with out success.
I presume that it is a temporary problem.
The Biosemiotics site is:
To the List:The following quote, the fourth and part of the fifth paragraphs, is from Ms. 325, "Pragmatism Made Easy" (We are thankful to Juan Pablo Serra for posting this Ms.)"The particular point that had been made by Bain and that had most struck Green, and through him, the rest of us, was the
19 matches
Mail list logo