Sung, I assume no such thing. Where did you get this idea from? You are unreasonably adept at setting up straw men to try to justify yourself. You did it recently with Edwina as well. This is not only bad reasoning, but it is rather rude as well.
Your claims overall make no sense, since there is little relation between Popper’s “worlds” and the Peircean categories, especially in trying to relate them to fields of studies, which the Popperian worlds bridge completely, as do the Peircean categories. As I have said, your first mistake is that you are applying the notion of structure to firsts, which is a violation of both the common sense and technical notions of ‘structure’. You are stumbling around in your own conceptual fog, and it isn’t nice to watch. John Collier Professor Emeritus, UKZN http://web.ncf.ca/collier From: sji.confor...@gmail.com [mailto:sji.confor...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Sungchul Ji Sent: Thursday, 03 December 2015 12:30 AM To: PEIRCE-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] signs, correlates, and triadic relations Hi Clark, lists, You wrote: "I’m not quite sure why you are applying firstness to structure where structures (120215-1) are inherently relations and firstness is inherently a thing in itself without relations." (1) It seems that everybody, including you, John (and myself until recently), assumes that there is only one way to distribute the Peircean categories of Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness over the three worlds of Burgin, denoted as S (World of Structures), P (Physical world),and M (Mental world). Let me designate such a view as the 1-to-1 view, according to which only one of the 6 possibilities shown in Table 1 is true and the rest are not. The alternative view would be that more than one of the 6 possibilities listed in Table 1 can be true, depending on context. I will refer to this view as the "1-to-many" view. Table 1. Non-deterministic relation between triadic model of the worlds and Peircean categories. Possibilities Firstness Secondness Thirdness Context or Field of Studies 1 S* P M ? 2 S M P ? 3 P S M ? 4 P M S ? 5 M S P ? 6 M P S ? *S = World of structures P = Physical world M = Mental world (2) It may be necessary to invoke at least two kinds of "structures" -- (i) "mental structures", i.e, those structures in the world whose existence depends on the human mind (through discovery, creativity, and production), and (ii) "real structures" that can exist independent of human mind. The S in Possibility 1 and 2 above are of the first kind (i.e., real structures) and the S in Possibilities 4 and 6 are of the second kind (i.e., mental structures). (3) Even with my very limited reading of Peirce, I can recognize that Table 1 is consistent with the basic tenet of the Peircean semiotics that all signs (including S, P and M in Table 1) have in each the three basic aspects of Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness, although each of the 6 possibilites shown in Table 1 PRESCINDS different aspect of each sign. For example, Possibility 1 rescinds the Firstness aspect of S, the Secondness aspect of P, and the Thirdness aspect of M. In contrast, Possibility 6 prescinds the Firstness aspect of M, the Secondness aspect of P and the Thirdness aspect of S, etc. If (2) and (3) are right, the 1-to-many view described in (1) would be validated. All the best. Sung On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Clark Goble <cl...@lextek.com<mailto:cl...@lextek.com>> wrote: On Dec 1, 2015, at 7:16 PM, Sungchul Ji <s...@rci.rutgers.edu<mailto:s...@rci.rutgers.edu>> wrote: (1) I agree with you on the definition of these categories of Peirce. We seem to disagree on how to assign these categories to the three worlds of Burgin and the three roses of Scotus. I’m not quite sure why you are applying firstness to structure where structures are inherently relations and firstness is inherently a thing in itself without relations. You seem to be using firstness due to invariant and thus structures. But I don’t see how that works. Being invariant is not the same as being unrelated. ----------------------------- 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<mailto:peirce-L@list.iupui.edu> . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu<mailto: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<tel:732-445-4701> www.conformon.net<http://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 .
