BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}JAS, list
Simply repeating your position is not an argument. As I've said -
you have failed to differentiate - and it's a crucial differentiation
- between 'idealism' and 'objective idealism'.
This means, in my view, that you have rejected the basic generative
and dynamic complexity of Peirce. You have reduced him to a simple
authoritarian Platonist! But Peirce's infrastructure is, instead, a
complex adaptive system.
This includes the self-organizing dynamism of the Peircean framework
- with his view that the nature of evolution "must proceed according
to some principle; and this principle will itself be of the nature of
a law. But it must be such a law that it can evolve or develop itself"
7.515.
How does it do this? By means of the complex processes of semiosis -
which include the process of DO-IO-R-II-DI-FI and the vital role of
the three categories in their different modes of
:1-1;2-2;2-1;3-3;3-2;3-1. These all work to enable novelty, chance,
freedom - and - individuation - and stability and generality. This is
a complex system- far beyond the capacity of any simple idealism.
And you have rejected his synechism which will "not admit that
physical and psychical phenomena are entirely distinct - whether as
belonging to different categories of substance or as entirely
separate sides of one shield but will insist that all phenomena are
of one character, thought some are more mental and spontaneous,
others more material and regular" 7.570
You have, in my view, confined Peirce to a simple 'mental'
determinism - where some Ideal Form is a priori and primordial. This
is basic Platonism - and Peirce was an Aristotelian - which rejects
such deterministic idealism.
By ignoring the term of 'objective' - I think you have denied the
complex adaptive nature of Peircean semiosis - but - I don't think we
are going to convince each other of the validity of each other's
views.
Edwina
On Sat 03/08/19 10:52 AM , Jon Alan Schmidt jonalanschm...@gmail.com
sent:
Edwina, List:
Again, Peirce's position is quite plainly stated in the text of CP
6.24-25--not dualism, neutralism, or materialism, but idealism;
specifically, objective idealism, which holds "the psychical law
alone as primordial" and "that matter is effete mind."
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USAProfessional Engineer, Amateur
Philosopher, Lutheran Laymanwww.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt [1] -
twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt [2]
On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 12:41 PM Edwina Taborsky < tabor...@primus.ca
[3]> wrote:
JAS, Gary R, list:
I continue to disagree with your stance that Peirce's objective
idealism is equivalent to idealism - and that 'the psychical law is
primordial' - with the psychical law as 3ns.
My reading of Peirce is that NOTHING is primordial - neither Mind
nor Matter. Instead, my reading of Peirce is that objective idealism
means that Mind is working on Matter. Again, Peirce did not say that
his theory was 'idealism'; he specifically used the term of
'objective' added to that idealism. What is 'objective'? An external,
non-subjective object; ie, matter. Mind cannot operate on its own;
therefore, it is working with/on Matter
My understanding of Peirce is that both Matter and Mind are
co-evolving. Neither is primordial; but they co-evolve in complexity.
An atom is less complex than a cell, and the Mind that functions as
the organization of an atom is less complex than the Mind that
organizes the organization of a cell. What is going on in our
universe is the co-development of Mind-as-Matter and Matter-as-Mind;
both increasing in complexity. Again - neither is primordial.
I consider it an error to think that 3ns, or habit-taking is
primordial. As Peirce says, 'three elements are active in the
world:first, chance; second, law, and third, habit-taking' 1.409.
That is - the three categories are not primordial.
What is primordial? Nothing. As Peirce writes - "in the beginning -
infinitely remote - there was a chaos of unpersonalized feeling, which
being without connections or regularity would properly be without
existence" 6.33
That is - there is no 3ns in this state of 'unpersonalized feeling'.
This means - there is no 'Mind' or 'idealism.
Edwina
Links:
------
[1] http://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt
[2] http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
[3]
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 .
