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 .
