Gary F., List: GF: I can’t honestly say that I find this post (or your follow-up to it) very useful for explicating the relationship between EGs and phaneroscopy ...
Understood; I was obviously responding to your comments about EGs in general, and sorting out accordingly how treating everything except the Continuous Predicate as Subjects would affect our interpretation of them. GF: This 1906 letter to Welby is rather obscure, so I’ll put it out there before commenting on it: http://gnusystems.ca/PeirceWelbyMarch1906.htm Thank you for making that content available, showing the context of what I quoted. It includes further remarks about both the Line of Identity and the "blank leaf" of coexistence as Continuous Predicates without ever using that term, since Peirce had not introduced it yet. GF: I doubt that R 300 is as late as 1908 ... Further investigation online revealed that this dating was affirmed at least as long ago as 1973, by Don Roberts in his book, *The Existential Graphs of Charles S. Peirce*. In fact, he claims even more specifically that R 300 was "written about March of 1908" (p. 99 n. 11). However, he does not provide the reasons for this determination; and I also do not know why the earlier dates were assigned by others, including Robin. GF: ... I’d like to know if anyone has a transcription of “The Bed-Rock beneath Pragmaticism” (R 300) that they’d care to share. Bisanz's version seems to be the only published one. I have a copy of that book right now, thanks to interlibrary loan. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:59 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > Jon (and list), > > I can’t honestly say that I find this post (or your follow-up to it) very > useful for explicating the relationship between EGs and phaneroscopy — but > I’ve had a few distractions in recent days and haven’t had time yet to > prepare a better alternative. For one thing, I’m not finished reading the > Atkins book, and since he’s obviously thought through these issues very > thoroughly I don’t want to waste time reinventing the wheel until I have > something better to propose. What I will do in this post is provide a link > to the context of the quote you include from SS 198 (since this text is not > widely available and has a lot to say on the topic). This 1906 letter to > Welby is rather obscure, so I’ll put it out there before commenting on it: > http://gnusystems.ca/PeirceWelbyMarch1906.htm > > You also mention “The Bed-Rock beneath Pragmaticism” (R 300), which I’m > currently reading in manuscript because there’s only one existing > transcription that I know of (in Bisanz, *The Logic of > Interdisciplinarity*) and I don’t have access to that. I haven’t started > a transcription of my own yet, but I’m studying it as part of Peirce’s > unpublished MSS attempting to follow up on the 1906 “Prolegomena to an > Apology for Pragmaticism” in the *Monist*, all of which have a direct > bearing on our subject line, and on Peirce’s “proof” of Pragmaticism. In > his Introduction to EP2, Nathan Houser cites this group of MSS (although > none of them is included in EP2): > > [[ Midway through his third *Monist* series, Peirce changed his mind and > decided to base his proof on his Existential Graphs. He never completed his > graph-based proof, but there are many manuscript pages indicating what he > had in mind. In one draft (MS 298) Peirce explained: “You ‘catch on,’ I > hope. I mean, you apprehend in what way the system of Existential Graphs is > to furnish a test of the truth or falsity of Pragmaticism. Namely, a > sufficient study of the Graphs should show what nature is truly common to > all significations of concepts; whereupon a comparison will show whether > that nature be or be not the very ilk that Pragmaticism (by the definition > of it) avers that it is. . . .” That proof, as represented in preliminary > form in Peirce’s 1906 “Prolegomena to an Apology for Pragmaticism” (CP > 4.530–72) and in MSS 296– 300, is extremely complex. It depends heavily on > establishing that the system of Existential Graphs provides a working model > of thought and that experimenting with the Graphs amounts to experimenting > with concepts themselves. … ] Peirce Edition Peirce Edition Project. The > Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings (1893-1913) (p. xxxvi). > Indiana University Press. Kindle Edition. ] > > I doubt that R 300 is as late as 1908; anyway it clearly belongs with the > group Houser refers to. This gives me a lot of material to work through and > I’m in no hurry to draw conclusions from it all, so it may be awhile before > I have anything much worth posting under this head. But meanwhile, I’m > interested in what you or other list members have to say on the subject — > and especially I’d like to know if anyone has a transcription of “The > Bed-Rock beneath Pragmaticism” (R 300) that they’d care to share. I don’t > want to reinvent *that* wheel either. > > The Peirce letter to Welby that I mentioned at the top is rather long to > include in a post, so here’s a link to the version on my website: > http://gnusystems.ca/PeirceWelbyMarch1906.htm > > Gary f. >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
