Edwina,

 

Again, you are saying that the Sign is a “triad” and that the Representamen is 
a part of that triad. I’m not sure what Frances is saying, but what Peirce is 
saying in these quotes is that “A Sign is a representamen,” which is “a 
correlate of a triadic relation.” Peirce does not say that a Sign is a “triad” 
or a “triadic relation”: it is a correlate of a triadic relation, and a 
Representamen (though perhaps not the only kind). If you know of any Peirce 
quote saying that a sign is a “triad”, please post it here. Otherwise please 
stop claiming that your peculiar use of the word “Sign” is the same as 
Peirce’s. 

 

Gary f.

 

From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca] 



Gary F - Again, the Representamen does not exist, as Frances is using it, on 
its own; it's an integral part of the triad. The 2.274 reference is analyzing 
the Sign (the triad) which includes the mediate Representamen without a 'mental 
process'.  …

 

Edwina

----- Original Message ----- 

From: g...@gnusystems.ca <mailto:g...@gnusystems.ca>  

 

Frances, Edwina, list,

 

Just to straighten out the terminology here …

For Peirce, a “representamen” is a correlate of a triadic relation, and a 
“sign” is a kind of representamen. By this definition, there can be 
representamens that are not signs; but empirically, Peirce has very little to 
say about them. Two passages from the 1903 “Syllabus” should make this clear:

 

CP 2.242, EP2:290:  A Representamen is the First Correlate of a triadic 
relation, the Second Correlate being termed its Object, and the possible Third 
Correlate being termed its Interpretant, by which triadic relation the possible 
Interpretant is determined to be the First Correlate of the same triadic 
relation to the same Object, and for some possible Interpretant. A Sign is a 
representamen of which some interpretant is a cognition of a mind. Signs are 
the only representamens that have been much studied.

 

CP2:274, EP2:273:  A Sign is a Representamen with a mental Interpretant. 
Possibly there may be Representamens that are not Signs. Thus, if a sunflower, 
in turning towards the sun, becomes by that very act fully capable, without 
further condition, of reproducing a sunflower which turns in precisely 
corresponding ways toward the sun, and of doing so with the same reproductive 
power, the sunflower would become a Representamen of the sun. But thought is 
the chief, if not the only, mode of representation.

 

Gary f.

 

-----------------------------
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 .




Reply via email to