At 07:30 PM 11/4/2014, Gary Fuhrman wrote:
Howard, thanks for that clarification. But I had no idea that Peirce had ever tried to reduce either discreteness or continuity to the other, or derive one from the other. Can you tell us where and when he tried to do that, or said that he had?
See on line Gwartney-Gibbs <http://www.philosophy.uncc.edu/mleldrid/SAAP/USC/DP16.html>Continuous <http://www.philosophy.uncc.edu/mleldrid/SAAP/USC/DP16.html>Frustration. Paper: Herron, C. S. Peirce's theories of infinitesimals. Trans. C. S. Peirce Soc. 23(3): 590-645, 1997.
Books:Buckley, The Continuity Debate, Docent Press, 2008. Zalamea, Peirce's Logic of Continuity. Docent Press 2012. Howard
gary f. -----Original Message----- From: Howard Pattee [mailto:hpat...@roadrunner.com] Sent: 4-Nov-14 4:45 PM HP: I have never said or implied anything like the "existence of discontinuities or "punctuations" refutes the reality of continuity." My point has always been that discreteness and continuity are irreducible complementary modes of thinking. Complementary here means that neither conceptually nor formally can discreteness or continuity be derived from or reduced to the other. From what I have read, after many tries this was also Peirce's result. (Note however, the modern physicists' view does not depend on Peirce's arguments.) Howard
----------------------------- 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 .
