Heh - Jerry, see my responses:
On Wed 30/01/19 4:25 PM , Jerry LR Chandler
jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com sent:
On Jan 30, 2019, at 3:04 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote:
1] By all means - one can choose the words one uses. But if very few
understand them - then, how functional is your communication?
JC: In response to your question, one uses the word in a context
appropriate. Thats how new words entry into the evolution of
language.
EDWINA: To declare that 'one uses the word in a context appropriate'
doesn't deal with the problem of: "if very few understand your words'
- then, the communication is empty of meaning'. The key concerns are:
'very few'. Certainly, one can use an obscure term, whose usage is
confined to a select few of initiates into that context' - but- this
isolation of Peircean theory to a select few is exactly what we have
been discussing.
2] How is John's statement an 'emotional appeal’?
JC: My interpretation was explained y the absence of reasons in the
sciences.
EDWINA I'll have to repeat. How is John's statement an 'emotional
appeal'? He had already declared his concern that the use of terms
whose usage is confined to a 'select few initiates' means that
Peircean thought cannot be expanded into a broader usage. That's a
rational reason.
Nor is it at all a 'highly unusual linguistic claim’. JC: In 6
decades of reading stuff from many different discipline, I can not
recall a comparable usage of the word “obsolete.” I am not
asserting that this usage was a singularity,
EDWINA I commend you. I certainly can't recall all usage of words in
my 6 and more decades of reading stuff from many different
disciplines. But I can certainly recall references to beliefs and
practices that are 'obsolete'. Hardly unusual.
3] Since narcissism refers to a personality type, then, how can an
objective comment about the common usage or not of a particular term
have anything remotely to do with 'narcissism’?
Many psychologists would find this usage of the word narcissism as
metaphorically meaningful.
EDWINA: This is, as you know, a false argument: an
'appeal-to-authority'. Add to that fallacy, the term 'many' is
ambiguous...as is the phrase 'metaphorically meaningful'. In other
words - your response is empty.
JC: In my experience and judgment, many philosophers have
narcissistic tendencies. As do individuals in all walks of life.
EDWINA: So what? Because many individuals have 'narcissistic
tendencies does not logically or scientifically mean that John has
such a tendency.
JC: I admire your response because of the meaningfulness of topics
you choose to respond to. EDWINA; Fiddle and piffle.
Links:
------
[1]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'tabor...@primus.ca\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
-----------------------------
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 .
