Edwina,
You wrote:
In my view, the citizen or government are Signs, full triads
[Object-Representamen-Interpretant]. As such, they can interact with other full
triad Signs using any of the six categorical modes, both genuine and degenerate
[1-1, 2-2, 2-1, 3-3, 3-2, 3-1].
--
Also in my view, but I keep insisting that it is possible to look at this
complexus as a monad entering an interaction with another monad, the complexus
being involved. For instance when describing an interaction and its ensuing
proces of interpretation we just start with identifying the actors. I don't
think we disagree on this point. what is involved will evolve in the process of
analizis. Which in order to be relatively complete must deal with two
processes: 1. 'a,b-result' and 2. 'b,a -result'.
You wrote:
3] You say that a citizen or government can be considered a monad [Firstness]
.which then interacts [Secondness]..etc. I disagree with this, for it seems to
be using the categories within a linear order, ie, setting them up as ordinals
where First=Firstness, and Second=Secondness and Third=Thirdness. I disagree
with such an analysis.
--
I can't easily respond to this for the risk of suffering from a lack of
understanding the meaning. Do you state that you disagree with me raising that
impression of linearity, knowing that I don't commit that fault or are you
politely stating that I take matters linear?
If the latter, I disagree. In KiF the input output relation stands as a line
perpendicular on the diamond, in the center at the index position, signifying
the cotagation of all involved triadic relations. The plane is for analytical
purposes. It is structured according to the categorical dependency relations,
but has to be filled in with the telos of the proces of investigation in mind
and explicated in the procress description.
You wrote:
Although, I note that Peirce's cosmology puts Firstness as First] And
then...we begin to disagree.
--
For me the primacy issue is a matter of different ways of looking at matters.
Akin to Aristotles remark on first in the order of being as contrasted to the
order of knowledge. Or Stampers distinction between a radical subjectivist and
an actualist perspective on matters. As long as no ideological goals are served
by the discussion, I am fine with either approach.
Auke
Op 9 april 2020 om 14:46 schreef Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca>:
>
> Auke - Thanks for your comments...I'll continue with my own comments
>
> 1] I don't say that my view is not suited/or is suited to political
> issues. I was only discussing the categorical mode of Thirdness, and since
> Thirdness is an action providing rule-based continuity- then, of course, it
> functions within the political or societal realm of life. Thirdness of
> course, not does function alone [see 5.436]. None of the categories, really,
> function alone.
>
> 2] I agree therefore that the Sign, as a triad, is the point of departure
> - not the nature of Thirdness. [Nor, indeed, are any of the categories the
> 'point of departure'. Although, I note that Peirce's cosmology puts Firstness
> as First] And then...we begin to disagree.
>
> 3] You say that a citizen or government can be considered a monad
> [Firstness] .which then interacts [Secondness]..etc. I disagree with this,
> for it seems to be using the categories within a linear order, ie, setting
> them up as ordinals where First=Firstness, and Second=Secondness and
> Third=Thirdness. I disagree with such an analysis.
>
> In my view, the citizen or government are Signs, full triads
> [Object-Representamen-Interpretant]. As such, they can interact with other
> full triad Signs using any of the six categorical modes, both genuine and
> degenerate [1-1, 2-2, 2-1, 3-3, 3-2, 3-1].
>
> So, if we use as an example, a government or society as a full triadic
> Sign, then, it could be reacting to the action of another government or
> agency [its Object] within a mode of Secondness [eg, 9-11]; where the govt,
> first reacts to the impact of 2ns, and the Immediate Interpretant is in a
> mode of 1ns; the next is 2ns - and then, using its knowledge base within the
> Representamen, the Final Interpretant in a mode of 3ns. But these are not
> linear; they are 'experiences' so to speak and more complex.
>
> Edwina
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu 09/04/20 4:28 AM , Auke van Breemen a.bree...@chello.nl sent:
>
> > >
> > Edwina,
> >
> > Thanks for the clarification. It seems to point to the difference
> > in our respective approaches, and I agree that yours is not ideally suited
> > to adress political issues. For completeness sake: for me, a sign that
> > fulfills its sign-function in raising interpretant signs (responses) is the
> > point of departure, not the nature of thirdness and its degenerate modes.
> > So, for me a citizen or government can be looked at as two monads A,B
> > (firstness), that on a specific occasion interact AB (secondness), with a
> > response C as a consequence (a first until it interacts itself). The
> > description of the process that leads to the response intends to express
> > the law(s) (thirdness) that governs the process. The distinctions made with
> > regard to signs (small or 1902/3 classification) scaffold the description.
> >
> > Best, Auke
> >
> >
> >
> > Op 8 april 2020 om 23:32 schreef Edwina Taborsky :
> >
> >
> > </tabor...@primus.ca>
> >
> > > > >
> > > Auke - thanks for your post.
> > >
> > > In this analysis, I'm looking at only the operation of
> > > Thirdness in both its genuine and degenerate modes. That is - I'm not
> > > considering the nature of the triad, ie, the Sign [a member of society, a
> > > government].I am not considering the triadic relations which make up a
> > > Sign. I am considering only of the category of Thirdness - which is the
> > > 'medium or connecting bond'. 1.337. that is Thirdness sets up
> > > commonalities.
> > >
> > > Thirdness, operating within a degenerate mode, i.e., within
> > > Secondness - sets up a specific type of commonality.an existential
> > > 'physical connection' , as an example, Peirce tells us of how 'a pin
> > > fastens two things together by sticking through one and also through the
> > > other. 1.366. My view of this 'pin' in a society is that 'networked
> > > interactive community. This is not necessarily intentional; it is indeed
> > > almost accidental, in that proximity within a common location binds the
> > > individual units into some kind of cohesion.
> > >
> > > Thirdness, operating within Firstness - suggests 'resemblance
> > > between forms' [1.367] - something which he refers to also as 'Thirds of
> > > comparison. My view of this in a society, understood as a collection of
> > > individuals [not a random set] is that there is a certain degree of
> > > similarity of type that established that commonality in this population.
> > > Therefore - some aspects cannot be 'decided on one's own'; for the point
> > > of a collection is its commonality.
> > >
> > > As for genuine Thirdness - I don't see it as a 'networked
> > > interactive community' - for I consider that this 'network' relies on the
> > > existence [2ns] of 'things'...which is why I see the networked
> > > interactive community as 'things [people] held together by some common
> > > idea [3ns].
> > >
> > > But genuine Thirdness, in my view, remains as pure thought -
> > > 'that which is what it is by virtue of imparting a quality to reactions
> > > in the future' [1.343]
> > >
> > > Edwina
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed 08/04/20 4:40 PM , a.bree...@chello.nl sent:
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > Edwina,
> > > >
> > > > In your take at the matter a 'networked interactive
> > > > community' and índividuals interacting' seem to me not to be on the
> > > > same plane. I am inclined to see the first as a 3.3 and the second as a
> > > > 3.2.
> > > >
> > > > And, your 3.1 'mimetic population' is if taken as a
> > > > sign aspect iconicity, which is in basic semiotics of categorical value
> > > > 2.1 so if lifted to belong at bottom to thirdness a 3.2.1. if
> > > > government only offers suggestive (rheme 3.1) examples, individuals in
> > > > the populace are left to decide on their own.
> > > >
> > > > Since member of society and governemt are to be
> > > > regarded as signs, we are able to at least look at the matter from
> > > > three perspectives for each. Sign in itself, sign in relation to iets
> > > > object and sign as it adrfresses its interpreting sign.
> > > >
> > > > Auke
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Op 7 april 2020 om 16:58 schreef Edwina Taborsky :
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > Auke
> > > > >
> > > > > Governance, if we want to use a Peircean category
> > > > > to analyze it, would always have to be within the mode of Thirdness.
> > > > >
> > > > > Now- whether the governing mode is 3-1 [Thirdness
> > > > > operating in a mode of Firstness, which sets up a mimetic population]
> > > > > ; or 3-2, [Thirdness operating in a mode of Secondness] which sets up
> > > > > a networked interactive population [ie, individuals interacting]; or
> > > > > 3-3 [Thirdness operating in a mode of Thirdness] - which is pure
> > > > > ideology detached from a population - well, I think we could analyze
> > > > > such a framework. Not easy of course.
> > > > >
> > > > > But the article did not deal with the categories
> > > > > in this way; instead, it simply too each category 'in itself' and
> > > > > judged how it would operate as the guiding principle of a society. I
> > > > > disagree with such a tactic for the reasons I already gave.
> > > > >
> > > > > Edwina
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue 07/04/20 10:10 AM , Auke van Breemen
> > > > > a.bree...@upcmail.nl sent:
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > Edwina, list,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I feel inclined to give a less unfavorite
> > > > > > response to the suggestion, although the way of putting things is
> > > > > > too crude.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > if we want to look at diferent kinds of
> > > > > > governments from a categorical perspective. The first thing we must
> > > > > > admid is that always the categorical distinction must be taken in a
> > > > > > relative way, i.e. it is about a firstness, secondness and
> > > > > > thirdness aspect of a third.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If taken in this way we could design a
> > > > > > Trikon (taken as a ternary plot), dealing with control in society.
> > > > > > First monad is self control or anarchy, second node is complete
> > > > > > control or dictatorship and the third is representive government
> > > > > > with free elections.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now, it is immediately evident that all
> > > > > > governments we score on the trikon partake in all three aspects but
> > > > > > differ in the mixture.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With respect to the pandemic, we must
> > > > > > accept that at this moment we cannot say which type of political
> > > > > > response proves best. What we can do is wait for the results,
> > > > > > investigate the measures taken and associate them with a score on
> > > > > > the Trikon. And next look at the consequences each of the
> > > > > > governments harvested.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But all that is stuff to be discussed on
> > > > > > the list and elsewhere. I guess the main intent after the message
> > > > > > was: in harsh times people are inclined to look after each other,
> > > > > > lets not forget keeping doing that once the cirsis is resolved. I
> > > > > > symphatize with that.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Auke van Breemen
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Op 7 april 2020 om 14:44 schreef Edwina
> > > > > > Taborsky :
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I disagree completely with this
> > > > > > > politicization of the Peircean categories. I consider that is
> > > > > > > shows a complete misunderstanding of the categories. I won't
> > > > > > > comment on the, what I feel are incorrect, political references.
> > > > > > > Just the description of the categories.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I disagree that Firstness can be
> > > > > > > compared to 'capitalism' which is, after all, an economic system
> > > > > > > based around the individual freedom of private enterprise; I
> > > > > > > disagree that Firstness refers only to the individual 'I' and
> > > > > > > even 'should' disappear.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > All three categories in the Peircean
> > > > > > > framework are necessary categories and none of them should be
> > > > > > > reduced or are 'privileged'.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Edwina
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon 06/04/20 10:37 PM , Gary
> > > > > > > Richmond gary.richm...@gmail.com sent:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > List,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Below is a brief report which
> > > > > > > > the distinguished Colombian scholar, Professor Fernando Zalamea
> > > > > > > > ( Universidad Nacional de Colombia) , Coordinator of the G rupo
> > > > > > > > de Estudios Peirceano , prepared at the request of the
> > > > > > > > Colombian Ministry of Science concerning the coronavirus
> > > > > > > > pandemic. It was first published late in March, 2020.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The report was recently
> > > > > > > > featured in a Spanish scholarly newsletter, edited by
> > > > > > > > Professors Jaime Nubiola, Sara Barrena, Izaskun Martínez, who
> > > > > > > > commented that the report " muestra de manera práctica cómo el
> > > > > > > > pensamiento de Charles S. Peirce ayuda a pensar situaciones tan
> > > > > > > > dramáticas como la presente" ("shows in a practical way how the
> > > > > > > > thought of Charles S. Peirce helps in thinking about situations
> > > > > > > > as dramatic as the present one.")
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Here follows the brief report,
> > > > > > > > first in Spanish and then in my (rough) English translation
> > > > > > > > (please refer to the original Spanish version). GR
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Breve texto sobre la
> > > > > > > > > pandemia desde una perspectiva triádica peirceana.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Fernando Zalamea
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Universidad Nacional de
> > > > > > > > > Colombia
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > En la arquitectónica del
> > > > > > > > > saber según Charles Sanders Peirce (USA, 1839-1914), tres
> > > > > > > > > categorías universales gobiernan los fenómenos: primeridad
> > > > > > > > > (lo que es en tanto tal, predicado monádico), segundidad (lo
> > > > > > > > > que es en tanto se correlaciona con otro, relación binaria) y
> > > > > > > > > terceridad (lo que es en tanto sirve de mediación en una
> > > > > > > > > polaridad, relación ternaria). Un caso particular de estas
> > > > > > > > > categorías se refiere a la sintaxis (lenguaje), la semántica
> > > > > > > > > (modelos) y la pragmática (transferencias).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > En el caso actual de la
> > > > > > > > > pandemia que vive el mundo (abril 2020), sobresalen algunos
> > > > > > > > > aspectos centrales desde un punto de vista filosófico,
> > > > > > > > > metodológico y matemático. Ante todo, resalta (A) la
> > > > > > > > > universalidad del fenómeno: rompe con cualquier tipo de
> > > > > > > > > distinción nacional y con cualquier tipo de estratificación
> > > > > > > > > social. A todos afecta y todos la sufren. Por supuesto, los
> > > > > > > > > más vulnerables (económica o físicamente) la sufrirán más,
> > > > > > > > > pero la pandemia cubre un espectro social muy amplio. Es
> > > > > > > > > plenamente tercera en el sentido de Peirce y media entre
> > > > > > > > > todos los seres humanos.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Esto conlleva unas
> > > > > > > > > directrices éticas básicas, que ojalá sirvan en el futuro
> > > > > > > > > para construir sociedades más equilibradas, allende el
> > > > > > > > > capitalismo salvaje (primeridad exacerbada) que ha venido
> > > > > > > > > destruyendo el mundo en las últimas décadas. No es ningún
> > > > > > > > > azar que los populistas tipo Trump, Bolsonaro o Johnson hayan
> > > > > > > > > querido reducir la importancia del fenómeno.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > La primera directriz es
> > > > > > > > > la importancia de luchar contra el egoísmo: la terceridad y
> > > > > > > > > la universalidad conllevan un darse a los demás, un pensar
> > > > > > > > > allende singularidades aisladas (primeridad). Es fascinante
> > > > > > > > > observar cómo el “yo”, un “en-sí” de muchas maneras
> > > > > > > > > repugnante, desaparece a favor del “en-múltiple”, de las
> > > > > > > > > redes de apoyo entre los individuos.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > La segunda directriz,
> > > > > > > > > correlacionada estrechamente con la primera, es la
> > > > > > > > > importancia de ser solidarios: cuidarnos a nosotros mismos es
> > > > > > > > > cuidar de los demás, y viceversa (de ahí el valor de los
> > > > > > > > > confinamientos). Dentro de esa línea solidaria, es hermoso
> > > > > > > > > ver cómo, en tiempos de dolor y de crisis, las comunidades
> > > > > > > > > se ayudan entre sí para superar duras condiciones de
> > > > > > > > > subsistencia.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Luego, sobresale (B) la
> > > > > > > > > integralidad sintética del fenómeno. Allende la arbitrariedad
> > > > > > > > > de las informaciones y los abusos del lenguaje (caso
> > > > > > > > > paradigmático, USA), la única solución posible parece ser una
> > > > > > > > > actuación colectiva correlativa (pragmática), donde todas las
> > > > > > > > > partes, desde los individuos hasta las instituciones,
> > > > > > > > > trabajen mancomunadamente hacia un fin bien definido. Acá se
> > > > > > > > > observa la importancia de actuaciones coherentes a nivel de
> > > > > > > > > mandatorios locales, como el Gobernador Cuomo en New York, o
> > > > > > > > > como la alcadesa López en Bogotá. En esos casos, las
> > > > > > > > > directrices están bien estructuradas (terceridad, a favor de
> > > > > > > > > todos), aunque muchos individuos indisciplinados (primeridad)
> > > > > > > > > rompan el patrón trazado. Los centenares de miles de muertos
> > > > > > > > > que se avecinan en USA serán el trágico ejemplo de una
> > > > > > > > > actuación profundamente insolidaria. Al opuesto, el cuidado
> > > > > > > > > colectivo conseguido en Taiwan debería ser tomado como modelo
> > > > > > > > > a seguir.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Como se ve, un uso
> > > > > > > > > elemental de las categorías peirceanas nos lleva a pensar en
> > > > > > > > > el bien común, muy por encima del bien individual. Es una
> > > > > > > > > cuestión de supervivencia. Ojalá las tragedias que produzca
> > > > > > > > > la pandemia sirvan a las nuevas generaciones para orientar
> > > > > > > > > mejor el futuro, un porvenir que debe pasar ante todo por el
> > > > > > > > > aprecio múltiple de los demás, para solo llegar luego al
> > > > > > > > > bienestar de los individuos.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > fernandozala...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Brief report on the pandemic
> > > > > > > > from a Peircean triadic perspective.
> > > > > > > > Fernando Zalamea
> > > > > > > > National University of Colombia
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In the architecture of
> > > > > > > > knowledge of Charles Sanders Peirce (USA, 1839-1914), three
> > > > > > > > universal categories govern the phenomena: firstness (what is
> > > > > > > > as such, monadic predicate), secondness (what is insofar as it
> > > > > > > > correlates with another, relationship binary) and thirdness
> > > > > > > > (which is insofar as it mediates a polarity, a ternary
> > > > > > > > relationship). A particular case of these categories refers to
> > > > > > > > syntax (language), semantics (models) and pragmatics
> > > > > > > > (transferences, transactions?)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In the current case of the
> > > > > > > > world pandemic (April 2020), some central aspects stand out
> > > > > > > > from a philosophical, methodological and mathematical point of
> > > > > > > > view. Above all, (A) it highlights the universality of the
> > > > > > > > phenomenon: it breaks with any type of national distinction and
> > > > > > > > with any type of social stratification. It affects everyone and
> > > > > > > > everyone suffers it. Of course, the most vulnerable
> > > > > > > > (financially or physically) will suffer the most, but the
> > > > > > > > pandemic covers a very broad social spectrum. It is fully third
> > > > > > > > in the Peirce sense of being in the midst of all human beings.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This entails basic ethical
> > > > > > > > guidelines, which hopefully will serve in the future to build
> > > > > > > > more balanced societies, beyond the savage capitalism
> > > > > > > > (exacerbated firstness) that has been destroying the world in
> > > > > > > > recent decades. It is no coincidence that populists like Trump,
> > > > > > > > Bolsonaro or Johnson have wanted to minimize the importance of
> > > > > > > > the phenomenon.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The first guideline is the
> > > > > > > > importance of fighting against selfishness: thirdness and
> > > > > > > > universality involve giving oneself to others, thinking beyond
> > > > > > > > isolated singularities (firstness). It is fascinating to
> > > > > > > > observe how the “I”, a repugnant “in-itself” in many ways,
> > > > > > > > disappears in favor of the “multiple,” of the support networks
> > > > > > > > between individuals.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The second guideline, closely
> > > > > > > > correlated with the first, is the importance of being
> > > > > > > > supportive: caring for ourselves is caring for others, and vice
> > > > > > > > versa (hence, the value of self-confinement). Within this line
> > > > > > > > of solidarity, it is beautiful to see how, in times of pain and
> > > > > > > > crisis, communities help each other to overcome harsh living
> > > > > > > > conditions.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Then, (B) the synthetic
> > > > > > > > integrality of the phenomenon stands out. Beyond the
> > > > > > > > arbitrariness of information and the abuse of language
> > > > > > > > (paradigmatic case, USA), the only possible solution seems to
> > > > > > > > be a correlative (pragmatic) collective action, where all
> > > > > > > > parties, from individuals to institutions, work together
> > > > > > > > towards a well-defined end result. Here we see the importance
> > > > > > > > of coherent actions at the level of local high officials, such
> > > > > > > > as Governor Cuomo in New York, or Mayor López in Bogotá. In
> > > > > > > > these cases, the guidelines are well structured (third party,
> > > > > > > > in everyone's favor), although many undisciplined individuals
> > > > > > > > (first party) break the established pattern. The hundreds of
> > > > > > > > thousands of deaths looming in the USA will be the tragic
> > > > > > > > example of deeply unsupportive action. On the contrary, the
> > > > > > > > collective care achieved in Taiwan should be taken as a role
> > > > > > > > model.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As can be seen, an elemental
> > > > > > > > use of the Peircean categories leads us to think about the
> > > > > > > > common good, far above the individual good. It is a matter of
> > > > > > > > survival. Hopefully the tragedies caused by the pandemic will
> > > > > > > > serve new generations in better guiding us toward the future, a
> > > > > > > > future that must first of all pass the appreciative assent of
> > > > > > > > many, only to later reach the well-being of actual individuals.
> > > > > > > > fernandozala...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Time is not a renewable
> > > > > > > > resource." gnox
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Gary Richmond
> > > > > > > > Philosophy and Critical Thinking
> > > > > > > > Communication Studies
> > > > > > > > LaGuardia College of the City
> > > > > > > > University of New York
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [Blocked image]
> > > > > > > > http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> > > > > > > > Virus-free. www.avg.com
> > > > > > > > http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > -----------------------------
> > > > > > > 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 .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > >
>
-----------------------------
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 .
