Dear Stan, list - My claim certainly does not entail that physics be entirely mechanistic. My observation is just that sign concepts are widespread in biology, not so in physics. This gives us the idea that biology studies real semiotic processes, while physics, including QM, does not. This observation, of course, only holds for the present state - as sciences evolve, it may be proved wrong by further developments in physics. You might also state my view by saying that biology constitutes the semiotic part of physics. Your pointing to the social role of industry and technology in the advancement of physics is quite important, still I take it to address the institutional part of the epistemology of physics, not the objects of physical research. But as my book addresses only the semiotics of propositions from biology and "upwards", it becomes less important whether we agree as to the status of semiotics in physics. Best F
Den 04/09/2014 kl. 15.58 skrev Stanley N Salthe <ssal...@binghamton.edu<mailto:ssal...@binghamton.edu>>: Frederick -- Your view of physics, while quite standard, is contextualized, after about 1900, by the fact that its social role has been to support and advance industry and technology. If we regard semiotics as a possible new orientation within physics, some interesting things may develop that are not wholly mechanistic. I anticipate the rejoinder that QM is not mechanistic. To this I reply (a) QM phenomena exist wholly WITHIN machines, (b) its interpretation has been attempted only within mechanicism. I note also that Howard's role for nonholonomic constraints is also a mechanistic perspective in the way that they are deployed arbitrarily rather than 'organically'. STAN
----------------------------- 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 .
