Sung: Please write more carefully. Please do not attribute your sentences to me.
You are free to interpret CSP's words however you wish. You are free to interpret any passage of CSP with any other passage of CSP however you wish. You are free to consider any passage of CSP as good sense or utter nonsense if you wish. Beyond my previous post, my only addition comment is that two of extra-ordinary qualities of CSP were his training as a chemist (which, by his own words, appears to influence most aspects of his logical writings and the graphic representations thereof) and two, his expertise in linguistics and grammar (which one seldom finds in any philosophical writer.) >From these two aspects of his character, I argue inductively that it is >possible that he has a specific grammatical purpose behind this utter >bastardization of terminology. Cheers Jerry On Sep 29, 2015, at 8:31 PM, Sungchul Ji wrote: > Hi Jerry, > > You wrote > > "The terms First, Second and Third are nouns. > The suffix term, "-ness" functions grammatically by changing nouns into > adjectives." > > > Are you sure Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness are adjectives ? > > Sung > > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Jerry LR Chandler <jerry_lr_chand...@me.com> > wrote: > Sung: > > > I meant what I wrote: > >> My conjecture is that CSP is intentionally invented these terms to infer a >> special class of objects that intrinsically communicate, grammatically, >> terms that implicitly contain the qualities of both being a noun and an >> adjective. >> Thus each of the three terms (Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness) contains >> in its sub-parts, roots of both. > > As I stated, it is a conjecture. > > Cheers > > Jerry > > > On Sep 29, 2015, at 4:57 PM, Sungchul Ji wrote: > >> Hi Jerry, >> >> Did you mean that First, Second and Third are adjectives and Firstness, >> Secondness and Thirdness are nouns ? >> >> All the best. >> >> Sung >> >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Jerry LR Chandler >> <jerry_lr_chand...@me.com> wrote: >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: Jerry LR Chandler <jerry_lr_chand...@me.com> >>> Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce and Practopoiesis: now I understand it better >>> Date: September 28, 2015 11:19:21 AM CDT >>> To: Danko Nikolic <danko.niko...@googlemail.com> >>> >>> Dear Danko: >>> >>> Would you like to consider a question? >>> >>> After struggling with the numerous statements of Firstness, Secondness, and >>> Thirdness for several years, I settled on one of his latest renditions >>> because of its mathematical implications as well as biochemical >>> interpretations, that is the version given in his private letter to Lady >>> Welby. >>> >>> In recent weeks, as a consequence of explorations of the meaning of >>> identity in utterances, statements and propositions, it occurred to me that >>> CSP proposes these terms in such a grammatical way that is extremely >>> innovative. (Recall that CSP depended heavily on English grammar to >>> formulate his logical propositions, such as in the medad and the trichotomy >>> of nine nouns as a universal logical/relational argument for whatever.) >>> >>> Presuppositions: >>> The terms First, Second and Third are nouns. >>> The suffix term, "-ness" functions grammatically by changing nouns into >>> adjectives. >>> >>> Example: >>> The ball is red. >>> The red ball is (predicate) >>> The redness of the ball is (predicate) >>> >>> My conjecture is that CSP is intentionally invented these terms to infer a >>> special class of objects that intrinsically communicate, grammatically, >>> terms that implicitly contain the qualities of both being a noun and an >>> adjective. >>> Thus each of the three terms (Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness) >>> contains in its sub-parts, roots of both. >>> >>> Note that this usage of "x-ness" is consistent with his chemical training >>> and modern chemical logic. >>> The formal logic of two atoms combining to form a molecule is of this type >>> of usage. >>> >>> Is this consistent or non-consistent with your meanings? >>> >>> I presume that you will find this to be a strange question. I pose it to >>> provide you an opportunity to explore the foundation of CSP logic in the >>> hard sciences, which is direct and wide-ranging and not at all amazing as >>> you suggest. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Jerry >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sep 28, 2015, at 3:57 AM, Danko Nikolic wrote: >>> >>>> Dear all, >>>> >>>> When I presented the list with the theory of practopoiesis and suggested >>>> that the three traverses can account for abductive reasoning, I also >>>> received a number of questions regarding Peirce's work to which I had no >>>> answers. The reason I had no answers was that I did not know much about >>>> work of Peirce other than abductive reasoning. >>>> >>>> Now, I would like to share with you that I have made a bit of a step >>>> forward. One of the questions (or suggestions) that I received was that >>>> perhaps the three levels of organization that I proposed (three traverses) >>>> correspond to the three Peirce's categories: Firstness, Secondness, and >>>> Thirdness. >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, I have learned more about Peirce and I think that the answer >>>> is: No. The three levels of organization do not correspond to these three >>>> aspects of our consciousness. Actually, it seems that all three categories >>>> should be assigned to the same level of organization, and this would be >>>> the middle level, which I named anapoiesis. >>>> >>>> I always thought that this middle level is the most interesting part of >>>> the theory, as it can produce a fascinatingly rich dynamics to explain >>>> consciousness. Now, it seems to me that 1ness, 2ness, and 3ness correspond >>>> very nicely to different aspects of its dynamics. So, it appears that this >>>> aspect of Pierce's work will be extremely helpful in the future in >>>> describing different aspects of adaptive processes in tri-traversal >>>> systems. >>>> >>>> Peirce's philosophy (at least a part of it) may even get some sort of a >>>> foundation in hard sciences, which would be amazing. >>>> >>>> I hope that someone finds this useful. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Danko >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Prof. Dr. Danko Nikolic >>>> >>>> >>>> Web: http://www.danko-nikolic.com >>>> >>>> Mail address 1: >>>> Department of Neurophysiology >>>> Max Planck Institute for Brain Research >>>> Deutschordenstr. 46 >>>> 60528 Frankfurt am Main >>>> GERMANY >>>> >>>> Mail address 2: >>>> Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies >>>> Wolfgang Goethe University >>>> Ruth-Moufang-Str. 1 >>>> 60433 Frankfurt am Main >>>> GERMANY >>>> >>>> ---------------------------- >>>> Office: (..49-69) 96769-736 >>>> Lab: (..49-69) 96769-209 >>>> Fax: (..49-69) 96769-327 >>>> danko.niko...@gmail.com >>>> ---------------------------- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----------------------------- >>>> 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 . >> >> >> >> > > > > ----------------------------- > 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 .
