> On Mar 30, 2017, at 3:15 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote: > > So- given the make-up of the posters on this list and their interest [in > philosophy] then, I don't see the point of bringing up the non-philosophical > focus of Peirce's work.
I should note that while my own interests are primarily philosophical, my background is actual primarily physics not philosophy. I enjoy the non-philosophical topics quite a bit although I often don’t know enough about the topic to say much. I’ve brought up some of the non-philosophical topics here before too such as the relationship of category theory in advanced physics or mathematics as it relates to Peirce. Not that I know much about category theory, but a few others made comments I learned from. So I am actually pretty interesting in the applied semiotics. Indeed while my interests are primarily philosophical I’ve read a reasonable amount on applies semiotics in various arenas. I seem to remember a discussion a few months ago on political implications of Peirce’s thought. I focused primarily on his more conservative tendencies in his critical common sensism but also the focus on inquiry. Anyway, please comment on the non-philosophical points. Even if I don’t typically comment I frequently read them.
----------------------------- 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 .
