List: I concur with John Sowa’s post and his observations on the need for intellectual honesty. Cheers
Jerry > On Mar 22, 2018, at 8:38 PM, John F Sowa <s...@bestweb.net> wrote: > > On 3/21/2018 2:22 PM, Gary Richmond wrote: >> Peirce says here that this kind of analysis "relates to a real and important >> three-way distinction." It may yet have been--at that point in time--"quite >> hazy," but since Peirce saw it as "a real and important three-way >> distinction" there would seem to be very good reason to continue to study it >> in the interests of rendering it at least a bit less imperfect. > > I agree that the issues are important. And I am not objecting to people > continuing to study the issues. > > I was trying to state a point about Peirce's ethics of terminology. > Note that he did not approve of people who took his word 'pragmatics' > and used it in a very different way. > > For the issues in this thread, Peirce himself said that he was unable > to state a precise definition in terms of his own system and that > Lady Welby was unable to state a precise definition of a related > concept in terms of her system. > > It's conceivable that somebody someday may define a related notion > more precisely in terms of some other system. But if that definition > were truly precise, it could not be exactly the same as any "hazy" > notion -- by Peirce, by Lady Welby, or by anyone else. > > In browsing through this thread, I see people claiming that their definition > is better or that they don't understand someone else's definition. > > I won't make any judgments about any of those claims. My only point > is that if any of those definitions are precise, then they cannot be > the same as the hazy notion that Peirce was trying to define. If so, > Peirce's ethics of terminology implies they should not use Peirce's > term -- they should choose a different word or phrase of their own. > > John > > ----------------------------- > 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 .
