At 06:15 AM 1/12/2015, Jon Awbrey wrote:
To begin with I could tell you that an object is any object of discussion or thought, like yesterday's news, today's catch, or tomorrow's sea battle, and what good would a logic be that could not talk or think of any object of discussion or thought?
HP: Jon, Your view of objects is sensible; but my confusion is still about what Peirce means by Object, Interpretant, etc.
Peirce: "A Sign is a Cognizable that, on the one hand, is so determined (i.e., specialized, bestimmt) by something other than itself, called its Object (or, in some cases, as if the Sign be the sentence "Cain killed Abel," in which Cain and Abel are equally Partial Objects, it may be more convenient to say that that which determines the Sign is the Complexus, or Totality, of Partial Objects. And in every case the Object is accurately the Universe of which the Special Object is member, or part), while, on the other hand, it so determines some actual or potential Mind, the determination whereof I term the Interpretant created by the Sign, that that Interpreting Mind is therein determined mediately by the Object." [1909 | Letters to William James | EP 2:492]
HP: I don't understand what Peirce means here and elsewhere by "determined." Peirce was ahead of his time in recognizing that physical events are not determined, but probabilistic. But even if he means probabilistically (mediately) determined, how is an interpreting mind (or potential mind) determined by an object? Does the Interpretant require a real mind or agent? What is a potential mind?
For example. if I accidently run into an object (e.g. a tree), I agree it will determine a primitive (nonlogical) angry state of mind, but it is only my interpreting (logical) mind that determines that the object is a tree (using a vast amount of subsidiary knowledge). I think biosemiotics says that the unique characteristic of life and mind is that they are not determined by laws of matter and energy.
But this is only my example. We are asking for Peircean real examples of basic concepts (not just definitions) that might be instructive below or beyond the peculiar human species.
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 .
