Hi,
Modern positivism, the (future) mainsource of present analytical
philosphy has been excellenty described by John F. Sowa in the list.
Dichotomic divisions into two, like ontology and epistemology,is the
ground for this line of philosophy, by now taken as a common starting
point in elementary education.
Then the ancients have been interpereted to fit the scheme. - Not so
Peirce.
Kirsti
Jerry LR Chandler kirjoitti 30.1.2017 18:44:
List:
On Jan 17, 2017, at 5:32 AM, [email protected] wrote:
But extending the dualism, even dichotomy of "ontology" and
"epistemology" to Aristotle is not just a (big) bone, but a grave
misrepresentation.
This distinction is a modern one. - Still going strong, in spite of
all criticism.
NOTHING LIKE that existed in ancient ways of thinking.
Kirsti points to critical issue in attempting to decipher the
self-designed code of language usage of CSP.
In particular, it is my experience that grasping the developments of
Western Science during the period of 1775 - 1850 is essential to
understanding the context in which CSP is expressing himself to his
world.
Part of this history is addressed from a mathematical viewpoint by
Salomon Bochner, in
ECLOSION AND SYNTHESIS: PERSPECTIVES ON THE HISTORY OF KNOWLEDGE.
I highly recommend this text to any scholar seeking to understand
“CSP-speak”.
Cheers
Jerry
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
