"Peircean" Yikes. The problem is that anything we do about Peirce of anyone really is characterization which I hold to be at worst a curse and at best a brake on the inherent freedom of anyone to grow, change or, ahem, participate in reality aka continuity. I will keep quiet but really.
*@stephencrose <https://twitter.com/stephencrose>* On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith <ste...@iase.us> wrote: > Contradictory and I doubt Peircean. > > Steven > > > On Monday, May 19, 2014, Søren Brier <sb....@cbs.dk> wrote: > >> 1. God is real but does not exist: so the best way to worship him is >> through the religion of science >> >> >> >> I thought this sums up nicely Section 9.6 in Kees' book and was a good >> way to start the discussion of: *God, science and religion*. Peirce's >> theory of the relation between science and religion is one of the most >> controversial aspects of his pragmaticist semiotics only second to his >> evolutionary objective idealism influenced by Schelling (Niemoczynski and >> Ejsing) and based on his version of Duns Scotus' extreme scholastic >> realism, which Kees' did an exemplary presentation of as well. Peirce's >> view of religion and how science is deeply connected to it in a way that >> differs from what any other philosopher has suggested except Whitehead's >> process philosophy, but there are also important differences here. >> >> >> >> I have no quarrels with Kees' exemplary understandable formulations in >> the short space he has. That leaves opportunity for us to discuss all the >> interesting aspects he left out like Peirce's *Panentheism* (Michael >> Raposa , Clayton and Peacock), his almost *Neo-Platonist* (Kelly Parker >> http://agora.phi.gvsu.edu/kap/Neoplatonism/csp-plot.html ) metaphysics >> of emptiness or *Tohu va Bohu* (see also Parker) and ongoing creation >> in his process view, and from this basic idea of emptiness ( that is also >> foundational to Nargajuna's Buddhism of the middle way ) a connection to >> Buddhism. This was encouraging Peirce to see Buddhism and Christianity in >> their purest mystical forms integrated into an agapistic >> *Buddhisto-Christian* process view of God. Brent mentions an unsent >> letter from Peirce's hand describing a mystical revelation in the second >> edition of the biography. This idea of Buddhisto-Christianity was taken up >> by Charles Hartshorne - one of the most important philosophers of >> religion and metaphysicians of the twentieth century - >> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hartshorne/ who also wrote about >> Whitehead's process view of the sacred (see references)*. * >> >> I have collected many of the necessary quotes and interpreted them in >> this article >> http://www.transpersonalstudies.org/ImagesRepository/ijts/Downloads/A%20Peircean%20Panentheist%20Scientific%20Mysticism.pdf >> , and in Brier 2012 below. >> >> >> >> Even Peirce's evolutionary objective idealism is too much to swallow for >> most scientists who are not fans of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. So even >> today it is considering a violation of rationality to support an >> evolutionary process objective idealism like Peirce's, which include a >> phenomenological view. Even in the biosemiotic group this is dynamite. We >> have h >> > > > ----------------------------- > PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to > peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L > but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the > BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
