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 .