Gary R and Jon AS, I'm writing a longer note about these issues in reply to Ben. But I just wanted to make one point about the comments below: Peirce acquired his bias toward mathematics at his father's knee. It dominated everything he wrote. And it's the reason why he put mathematics at the foundation for every science of any kind. The source data of phenomenology is independent of mathematics, but mathematical patterns (diagrammatic reasoning) is fundamental to the methods for analyzing that data. To see Peirce's bias in all its glory, do a global search for 'metaphysician' in CP and read all 43 excerpts. He made the point that the best metaphysics is always based on mathematics. He recommended diagrammatic reasoning (mathematics) for metaphysics. And he heaped scorn on metaphysicians who tried to do metaphysics without mathematics. John _________________________________________________________________ JFS: Mathematicians cringe when they hear nonmathematicians make such claims. JAS: People who are fully trained in one particular discipline have a natural bias toward treating just about anything through the lens of that discipline. GR: I agree with Jon's statement regarding disciplinary bias. On the other hand, over-generalizations such as John's "Mathematicians [implied, "all" or "most all"] cringe . ." are virtually never justified by the available evidence.
----------------------------- 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 .
