Exactly. The Sign, that 'irreducible triad' is a syllogism. The major premise is the Representamen relation; the minor premise is the Object relation; Conclusion is the Interpretant. This is a dynamic process, a transformative process and despite the criticism of some, I consider these three parts of the syllogism/Sign to be interactions, as each site or premiss does something transformative to the input data. It's not just a conveyor belt; the information is acted upon and 'thought about' from input sensation to result. And just as the syllogism is not made up of dyads but is always triadic, so the sign is also not made up of dyads but is triadic; that mediative Relation of the Representamen is vital.
Edwina ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary Fuhrman To: biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee ; 'Peirce List' Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2014 8:21 AM Subject: [PEIRCE-L] RE: Natural Propositions Now that our seminar on NP is under way, I've been asked to post the "reading schedule" for it, so I'm attaching and inserting it at the bottom of this message, along with the list of threadleaders. It is subject to change if necessary, but should give list members time enough to read each chapter as it's being discussed. For those who haven't yet obtained the book or read the introduction, I'd like to present here a quotation from Peirce which shows that long before he developed the famous ten classes of signs (diagram EP2:296), he was already thinking (as Frederik put it yesterday) that "the main phenomenon is reasoning, the chain of arguments - and the whole of the semiotic machinery is developed to understand the physiology of reasoning - so icons, rhemes, etc. refer to specific aspects of the chain of reasoning." For Peirce, this "physiology of reasoning" extends from the formal syllogism all the way down to the most primitive forms of cognition, and NP p.5-6 quotes this example from 1883: The cognition of a rule is not necessarily conscious, but is of the nature of a habit, acquired or congenital. The cognition of a case is of the general nature of a sensation; that is to say, it is something which comes up into present consciousness. The cognition of a result is of the nature of a decision to act in a particular way on a given occasion. In point of fact, a syllogism in Barbara virtually takes place when we irritate the foot of a decapitated frog. The connection between the afferent and efferent nerve, whatever it may be, constitutes a nervous habit, a rule of action, which is the physiological analogue of the major premiss. The disturbance of the ganglionic equilibrium, owing to the irritation, is the physiological form of that which, psychologically considered, is a sensation; and, logically considered, is the occurrence of a case. The explosion through the efferent nerve is the physiological form of that which psychologically is a volition, and logically the inference of a result. When we pass from the lowest to the highest forms of inervation, the physiological equivalents escape our observation; but, psychologically, we still have, first, habit--which in its highest form is understanding, and which corresponds to the major premiss of Barbara; we have, second, feeling, or present consciousness, corresponding to the minor premiss of Barbara; and we have, third, volition, corresponding to the conclusion of the same mode of syllogism. Although these analogies, like all very broad generalizations, may seem very fanciful at first sight, yet the more the reader reflects upon them the more profoundly true I am confident they will appear. They give a significance to the ancient system of formal logic which no other can at all share. ("A Theory of Probable Inference", 1883, 2.711 ) Here's the reading schedule with threadleaders and starting dates: Chapter Natural Propositions Threadleader(s) Start date 1 introduction Frederik Stjernfelt 1 Sep 2 anti-psychologism Jeff Kasser 8 Sep 3.1-7 dicisigns I Gary Fuhrman 22 Sep 3.8-14 dicisigns II Jeff Downard 6 Oct 4 naturalization Tyler Bennett 20 Oct 5 cognition Mara Woods 3 Nov 6 evolution John Collier 17 Nov 7 beyond language Tom Gollier 1 Dec 8 iconicities Gary Richmond 15 Dec 9 diagrams I 29 Dec 10 diagrams II 5 Jan 11-12 enlightenment Yogi Hendlin 12 Jan By the way we're still open to volunteers for co-leading any of these threads. gary f. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------- 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 .