Thanks very much for responding Clark. I am going to fish around and see if there is a post on Brent I could pass on, A bare summary is that he takes Peirce's icon, index, symbol triad and makes it clear (to me at least and we all read and understand somewhat differently) that he was creating a mode of thinking that did in fact have practical consequences. Again what is this about without such consequences? What difference does it make to speak of living according to a triadic maxim?
On consciousness and continuity my take differs in many respects. I see logic as a utility within consciousness, even the abductive logic that Peirce lauds in ordinary mores of thought. Consciousness is the state within which we make decisions according to the values we hold, which may or may not be conscious. The more conscious they are the better I think. I see continuity as having less with consciousness than simple chronology. Everything is in motion from time itself to all within time. Continuity is a sort of hint about teleology just as logic is a hint about goodness just as consciousness is a hint about freedom and choice which accords with Peirce's general sense of possibility and chance. The theological implications of all this are immense. We all live on the basis of different triggers. For me Brent was big in spite of his awkward and wooden effort to create a binary portrait of Peirce. If you can get the updated book it is worth a look but I will scour about and see f I have ever explained this reasoning. Cheers, S amazon.com/author/stephenrose On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:19 PM, CLARK GOBLE <cl...@lextek.com> wrote: > > On Feb 6, 2017, at 8:01 PM, Stephen C. Rose <stever...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Here is my answer. Triadic thinking is conscious consideration by > individuals. The first stage is that vague reality that comes up as a sign > and ends up becoming more likely a word than anything else. That enables > consideration, a second stage, an indexical query, sort of. For me that is > a list of values which are in effect an index of what Peirce called > memorial maxims. What Jeff calls metaphysical refers to the third stage > which is indeed the effect or action or expression that results from the > consideration of the first, the sign. That is the effect, the practical > outcome of the triadic consideration. For Peirce is this not the sine qua > non of inquiry itself? > > > I’m not sure I’d agree with the conscious part. What’s so interesting to > me in Peirce’s semiotic is the place of continuity which presupposes a kind > of unconscious/hidden aspect to all sign processes. Likewise his > externalism makes me think that most of what happens happens outside of > consciousness. > > That’s not to say his semiotic isn’t extremely useful for thinking through > conscious deliberation but I think the consequence of that analysis will > always be that a lot more is going on. > > Any way you slice it I cannot help thinking that this is what Brent was > trying to understand in his generally maligned biography of Peirce. It was > that chapter toward the end that helped me to see it. And I think Brent was > also, like me, fishing for the actual reason why Peirce could make the > outlandish claim that he would be built on like Aristotle. In any case, I > want to at least establish my question as legitimate. What does this all > aim at if not the way a practical person thinks, which would need to be > taught to replace the largely binary understandings that permeate culture > and understanding generally. > > > I must have missed a post. I assume you mean Joseph Brent’s biography. I > confess I’ve not read it. Could you possibly summarize that? I’m missing > something here. (Undoubtedly my fault - my apologies I sometimes can’t keep > up with the list and never quite find the time to go back and catch up) > > > ----------------------------- > 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 .
