How my post sounds to you, or how you choose to label it, is not an issue for
the Peirce list, Edwina. If there is an issue for the list, it’s probably the
distinction between dynamic and immediate objects. You have said nothing about
that issue, or about anything relevant to what my post as a whole actually
says, nothing that calls for a response. I’m only posting this because you
chose to copy to the list a casual response that I sent to you offlist.
Gary f.
} Abyss calls to abyss in the roar of Your channels (Psalms 42:8). [Zohar
1:52a] {
<http://gnusystems.ca/wp/> http://gnusystems.ca/wp/ }{ Turning Signs gateway
From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca]
Sent: 23-Oct-15 09:55
To: g...@gnusystems.ca; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Seeing things
Never mind the ad hominem - and the smiley face is irrelevant. Stick to the
issue. Again, the issue is that your outline sounds to me to be pure
postmodernist nominalism/relatavism. The opposite of Peirce's insistence on the
objective reality of objects - regardless of what anyone thinks of that
object....whereas you are saying that 'things are so because they are called
so'!
Edwina
----- Original Message -----
From: g...@gnusystems.ca <mailto:g...@gnusystems.ca>
To: 'Edwina Taborsky' <mailto:tabor...@primus.ca>
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 9:39 AM
Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Seeing things
That sounds to me like Edwina. :)
From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca]
Sent: 23-Oct-15 09:25
Sounds to me rather similar to postmodern relativism/nominalism.
Edwina
----- Original Message -----
From: g...@gnusystems.ca <mailto:g...@gnusystems.ca>
To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu <mailto:peirce-l@list.iupui.edu>
We see what we focus on: what we see distinguishes itself from the visual
field: the dynamic object determines the sign to determine its interpretant.
Cognition begins by making distinctions; recognition continues with emergence
of relations from the phaneron, now that
<http://gnusystems.ca/TS/cns.htm#thing> things have emerged from the phaneron.
A road is made by people walking on it; things are so because they are called
so.
— Chuangtse <http://gnusystems.ca/meanlist.htm#tao> 2 (Watson 1968, 40)
The chaotic background murmur and crackle of neurons firing, cells doing what
they muddily must to stay alive, organizes itself into definite rhythmic
patterns, and lo, forms emerge and begin to branch. Presence parts from itself
and proliferates as the branches take names. But a metaphor reverses the
process by unmaking a familiar distinction, revealing a richer and stranger
relationship. By thus renewing our vision, metaphors ‘literally create new
objects’ (Jaynes 1976, 50) – immediate objects. Naming is creation, metaphor
recreation. “A road” is a metaphor: a road is made by people walking on it;
things are so because they are called so.
Gary f.
} Thought is not an out-of-body experience. [Mark Turner] {
http://gnusystems.ca/wp/ }{ Turning Signs gateway
_____
-----------------------------
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 .
