Jon, Ben, list, My apologies. I hardly ever do this any more, but rushed for time, I managed to send this off-list message to the list. I don't think there's anything 5oo personal or controversial in it, but I do hate doing this sort of thing.
Best, Gary [image: Gary Richmond] *Gary Richmond* *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* *Communication Studies* *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* *C 745* *718 482-5690* On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> wrote: > off-list > > Jon, > > I just read parts 3 and 4 of your series in succession. What a fine > accomplishment. Perhaps if more scholars thought with your acuity and wrote > with your clarity and efficiency (succinctness), Peirce studies might be > much further along* in the world generally* than they are now. This is > also to suggest that I have no problem with the notion of the > "popularization" of Peircean pragmatism and semeiotic as long as his ideas > aren't distorted in some limited personal use (the various 'thieves of > Peirce' such as Charles Morris. Walker Percy--whom I may never forgive for > setting Ken Ketner in the wrong=literary direction in writing his probably > never to be completed proposed 3 voluem autobiography (stet) of Peirce as > he was in the position and had all the tools, including the philosophical > and mathematical ones, to write a definitive biography). > > But for now, and just speaking of your series, congratulations on an > extraordinary accomplishment, a line of argumentation which, if followed > and fully absorbed--that is, put into practice--might improve many a ones > thinking *and willing*. It certainly is doing that for me! > > I'd like to write more in response to it on the list, but I spent al good > portion of yesterday hangin' with the members of our NYC New Metaphysical > Club, then the late afternoon commenting on a paper on truth and the > nominalism vs realism question which Cathy Legg had posted on Academia for > comment, an excellent effort to move philosophers in the direction of > Peircean realism. Yet, as Kathleen Hull commented, culture as a whole > (including philosophy of course) is dominated by nominalism. Hull wrote: > "We are all nominalists, culturally;" and while this is not literally > so--there are some notable exceptions--making the case for Peirce's brand > of realism continues to be an uphill battle. > > In any event, I've little time to post anything today as I need to study > some Zalamea in order to make sure that I can follow at least some of what > he's saying this evening. The guy is so cutting edge that I think it will > take even the mathematical community quite a while to catch up with him. In > his precis on the Semiotics Web site he sets up three pairs of triads and I > want see if they match up with Peirce's categories--when I first looked at > that blurb I thought that they did not--so studying them is a principal > task of my afternoon. I'm glad that Jeff suggested our setting up a way to > attend remotely. Are you planning to GoToMeeting? > > The members of the NMC all agree that the paper you linked to (== the > first four chapters of Fernando's book on continuity), might make an > excellent slow read on list, and I hope to discuss this with him after his > talk this evening. Of the several suggestions I've received for a slow > read, I think that Z's paper makes the most sense for now especially since, > as Ben mentioned at our NMC lunch meeting yesterday, that there seems to be > quite a bit of interest in continuity on the list. As you probably > know--and may even agree--I see Z is the modern master on the topic. > > So, again, thanks for your 4 paper series (I'll read the first two > installments again when I get the chance) and especially those last two > papers (btw, I began the 3rd this morning thinking it was the 4th, and am > very glad I did). More sooner--I hope--than later. Lots to talk about. > > Cheers, > > Gary > > PS While the hip replacement is in good shape, I'm still on crutches > because of the muscle tear in my thigh. I have a feeling it will be a long > time healing. James is going to drive me one way, but I'm going to hazard > public transportation going there. Wish me luck! > > > > [image: Gary Richmond] > > *Gary Richmond* > *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* > *Communication Studies* > *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* > *C 745* > *718 482-5690 <(718)%20482-5690>* > > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt < > jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> List: >> >> Part 4, subtitled "Beyond Engineering," is now online at >> http://www.structuremag.org/?p=11107. It discusses how *anyone *can use >> the logic of ingenuity to imagine possibilities, assess alternatives, and >> choose one of them to actualize. I have argued for years that just as >> science is perceived as an especially systematic way of *knowing*, >> likewise engineering could be conceived as an especially systematic way of >> *willing*; and if this is really the case, then the distinctive >> reasoning process of engineers *should* be paradigmatic for other kinds >> of decision-making, including ethical deliberation. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon >> >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 7:50 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt < >> jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> List: >>> >>> Part 3, subtitled "Engineering Reasoning," is now online at >>> http://www.structuremag.org/?p=10592. It discusses how engineers use >>> the logic of ingenuity to simulate contingent events with necessary >>> reasoning. This is my attempt to explain Peirce's whole notion of >>> diagrammatic reasoning, using a variety of quotes from his writings. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Jon >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt < >>> jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> List: >>>> >>>> I meant to post this back around the first of the month, and then kept >>>> forgetting to do so. Part 2, subtitled "Engineering Analysis," is now >>>> online at http://www.structuremag.org/?p=10490. It discusses how >>>> engineers use the logic of ingenuity to solve real problems by analyzing >>>> fictitious ones. It mostly consists of quotes from and comments on CP >>>> 3.559, which is part of Peirce's 1898 article in *Educational Review*, >>>> "The Logic of Mathematics in Relation to Education" ( >>>> http://www.pragmaticism.net/works/csp_ms/P00653.pdf). It is the >>>> passage that opened up to me this whole understanding of engineering >>>> thinking, when I first encountered it in the volume edited by Matthew E. >>>> Moore, *Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Writings*. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Jon >>>> >>>> On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt < >>>> jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> List: >>>>> >>>>> In an effort to apply Peirce's thought to my profession of >>>>> engineering, as well as introduce it to my fellow practitioners, I have >>>>> written a four-part series of articles under this heading for >>>>> *STRUCTURE* magazine. Part 1, subtitled "Engineering Design," >>>>> appears in the September issue and is also posted online. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.STRUCTUREmag.org/?p=10373 >>>>> >>>>> In summary, I am defining "the logic of ingenuity" as the process of >>>>> (abductively) creating a diagrammatic representation of a problem and its >>>>> proposed solution, and then (deductively) working out the necessary >>>>> consequences, such that this serves as an adequate substitute for >>>>> (inductively) evaluating the actual situation. This first installment >>>>> discusses how engineers use it to design particular artifacts for specific >>>>> purposes, and connects it with many of my previous writings for the same >>>>> publication. >>>>> >>>>> Any and all feedback is welcome! >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA >>>>> Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman >>>>> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt >>>>> >>>> >> >> ----------------------------- >> 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 .
