Stephen,
Your suggestion seems to agree with the one expressed by Perry Marshall as follows: "Father (intent) -> Son (expression) -> Spirit (understanding) which corresponds to the elements of a Shannon communication system: Encoder - Message - Decoder (all of which must be in agreement for communication to occur)" I am sure there are many other ways of populating the blank spaces of the ur-category, depending on the point of emphasis or prescision. All the best. Sung Sung On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 6:43 PM, Stephen C. Rose <stever...@gmail.com> wrote: > The classic Christian Trinity triad is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Icon > Index Symbol > Creator, Incarnation, Gift of the Spirit to those with eyes > to see and ears to hear. > > Books http://buff.ly/15GfdqU Art: http://buff.ly/1wXAxbl > Gifts: http://buff.ly/1wXADj3 > > On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> Hi Sung, Lists, >> I so far rather think, that firstness is associated to representamen, and >> secondness to object. So I propose the following assignment, though just in >> the context of the christian God (because in christian religion there is >> already a triad, the trinity, which, I think, is ancient semiotics, a quite >> Peircean approach, long before Peirce): >> Firstness: Representamen relation, possibility: Holy Spirit. What spirits >> usually do is appear, and so they are representamens, because >> representamens also appear and with their appearance they create a >> possibility for whatever to happen next. >> Secondness: Object relation, actuality, in this case indexical: Jesus, >> whose (said) descent from both a human (Mary), and God, is supposed to be >> working as an actual index (to humans) for the actual connection between >> God and Humans. >> Thirdness: Interpretant relation, Relation: God as creator or, in other >> words, ground of evolution as well as aim of evolution (By this translation >> "in other words" I want to stress, that I am not agreeing with creationism). >> In other religions I think there are also such irreducible triads, like >> Sat, Cit, Ananda, but also dyads like Mazda-Ariman. I think it is all not >> reality but a matter of trying to find models for reality, and it is >> interesting to look for quasi-Peircean models in religions. On the other >> hand I am aware, that Peirce himself has interpreted the trinity and >> assigned its parts differently than I just did. Which makes me insecure, >> but I post it although, as it is not a theory to be stated, but only a >> proposal in the work and discussion in progress, as always. >> Best, Helmut >> >> *Gesendet:* Sonntag, 10. Mai 2015 um 04:19 Uhr >> *Von:* "Sungchul Ji" <s...@rci.rutgers.edu> >> *An:* PEIRCE-L <peirce-l@list.iupui.edu> >> *Cc:* biosemiotics <biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee> >> *Betreff:* [PEIRCE-L] Can it be that God is irreducibly triadic, a >> Peircean sign, and a mathematical category ? >> Hi, >> >> There are many definitions of God or its equivalents (Substance, Form, >> Dao, Gnergy, etc.) but all of these abstract nouns may share one thing in >> common, namely, the IRREDUCIBLE TRIADICITY. That is, these concepts may >> not be completely described without employing three mutually linked terms, >> concepts, or principles, like Borromean rings. This idea can be >> diagrammatically represented as follows, which I hope is self-explanatory: >> >> >> >> f g >> God as Possibility ------> God as Actuality -------> God as Regularity >> (Firstness) (Secondness) >> (Thirdness) >> [Object] [Representamen] >> [Interpretant] >> | >> ^ >> | >> | >> |________________________________________| >> h >> >> Figure 1. The hypothesis that God is irreducibly triadic and hence is a >> Peircean sign as well as a mathematical category. f = ontogenesis (?); >> g = epistogenesis (?); h = grounding, proof, truth (?) >> >> >> In the Peirce-L post dated May 8, 2015, I also suggested that Mind may >> be irreducibly triadic, and Mind may be a prerequisite for Step g above. >> >> If you have any questions, suggestions, or criticisms, let me know. >> >> All the best. >> >> >> Sung >> >> >> -- >> 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 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 . >> >> >> >> >> >> > -- 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 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 .
