Thirdness and its Function
1] I think a discussion of whether or not someone is a ‘nominalist’ vs a
‘scholastic realist’ can be empty – particularly when neither term is defined.
2] I think the nature of and role of Thirdness is vital – and ask whether or
not it can appear in either nominalism or scholastic realism or in both? First
– a brief definition.
Nominalism, in my view refers to a belief that generals or universals
[Thirdness] are concepts created by man and only individual entities ‘exist’.
Scholastic realism refers to the view that generals or universals, understood
as the rule of law governing individual instantiations of these laws -are real
in themselves and not creations of man.
3] I don’t think either view can be removed from its societal connections and
implications. The scholastic realism view fits into a societal view where the
laws of life, so to speak, are predetermined [ by god?] and fixed; they can’t
be changed by man’s whim. The nominalist view arose twice, in the 13th c and in
the 18th c – when the rise of individual freedom of thought emerged, and the
individual was seen as capable of not merely acceptance but of generating new
laws, new rules. These are monumentally different world views and have of
course, social and political implications.
4] Thirdness according to Peirce is, as developed by Nature, “ a mode of being
which consists in the Secondness that it determines” 1903. 1.536. And
“Thirdness cannot be understood without Secondness.” 1904. 8.331. Thirdness
mediates between input and output, between “the causal act and the effect’
1894.1.328 and Thirdness emerges ‘in nature’ 1887 1.366. – creating an
‘intelligible law.
Obviously these definitions of Thirdness are aspects of scholastic realism not
nominalism – but it is important to note both ultimate agency – Nature vs god
and correlations.
4] I note – and I think this is vital - Peirce emphasizes the role of
Secondness in actualizing Thirdness, ie, Thirdness does not function alone but
as correlated with Secondness and Firstness enabling it to existentially
function as that rule of law, to function as a predictive force of
morphological formation. Where, Thirdness in the ‘first degree of degeneracy’
1903. 5.70, in ‘irrational plurality, where the rule of law enables multiple
individuals all aspects of that rule of law”…
The key connective triadic sign is the Symbolic Indexical, [Thirdness as
Secondness] which has been recently discussed and is one of the key Signs in
Peircean semiosis.
5] I note that this insistence on the indexical actuality of Thridness moves
Peirce into an analysis where these rules can change! Because of that
connection with Secondness! These changing rules are not as concepts
articulated by man but, in themselves. This is not nominalism but moves into
the self-organized realm of CAS [ complex adaptive systems] which are a later
development in the scientific world – and is most certainly a concept rejected
by those who subscribed to the invincibility of these rules - ie- that
Secondness or actuality had no effect on them. .
Most certainly Peirce rejected predetermined Thirdness, with his support of
the ‘symbols grow’ ; the fact that Thirdness rules evolve, adapt and change –
due both to chance [ Firstness] Tychasm] and Agapasm or a feeling of
connectness to the data.
But he also rejected the vagaries of nominalism which sees a world without the
realities of non-human Thirdness, ie, without the reality of rules and laws
which are objectively real and not ‘figments of the mind’. Nominalism can move
into pure idealism, where the rules can be considered human ideas - and these
can lead to totalitarianism.
6] If we continue with the societal context – we can then ask – why does one or
the other theory become dominant? The theory of nominalism, which empowers man
to make-and-change-the rules of life; vs the theory of realism which inserts a
non-human agency as the source of the laws {Nature,god]. And – furthermore – an
additional concept that these laws are immutable and cannot change or be
changed vs that the laws can self-organize and change. I think these are two
basic mindsets which will always be with us – and we cannot ignore the societal
modes in which they operate.
Edwina
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] .
► <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=SIG%20peirce-l";>UNSUBSCRIBE FROM
PEIRCE-L</a> . But, if your subscribed email account is not your default email
account, then go to
https://list.iu.edu/sympa/signoff/peirce-l .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
