Kalevi,
According to the irreducible-triadic-diagram representation of the Peircean
sign is right, Peirce did address interpretation implicitly (see Step g in
Figure 1 below), because his Interpretant may be viewed as a mind
interpreting a sign:
f g
Object ----------> Sign ---------> Interpretnat
| ^
| |
|____________________________|
h
Figure 1. The Peircean sign as an irreducible triad, or a mathematical
category.
f = natural process (or sign production)
g = mental process (or interpretation)
h = information flow (or grounding)
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Kalevi Kull <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> is it right that Peirce almost never addressed *interpretation as a
> choice between options*? I.e., the relationship between semiosis and
> making choices?
>
> And if so - why?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Kalevi
>
>
>
>
--
Sungchul Ji, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology
Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy
Rutgers University
Piscataway, N.J. 08855
732-445-4701
www.conformon.net
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
