Edwina and Jon, Induction always begins with data -- a set of observations about some subject. By finding analogies and commonalities among the observations, it derives a probable hypothesis about the subject matter. Further testing is necessary to increase the probability and generalize the hypothesis to a wider range of phenomena. If the observations are about nature, the hypothesis is the starting point for some law of science. If the observations are about some text, the hypothesis is a starting point for some textual criticism. ET> I was saying that developing a strictly formal and textual argument about reality... My suggested continuation of that line: "requires data from new observations of reality." JAS> As with any scientific inquiry, in speculative grammar we employ retroduction to formulate hypotheses, deduction to explicate them, and induction to evaluate them. That is a worthy goal. But the data required for any theory of speculative grammar must ultimately come from experiences in the phaneron. If the only source of data is from texts by Peirce, your theory cannot go beyond what Peirce said. JAS> "Constant references to the text" are a valid inductive method for testing hypotheses about the text itself, as well as hypotheses about the views of the author as expressed in the text. That is a project in textual criticism. It can be used to clarify what Peirce was saying, but it cannot go beyond what Peirce said. In order to develop a version of speculative grammar that adds something new, it's essential to find new data. You must do your own phaneroscopy -- you must analyze experiences in your own phaneron according to the methodology that Peirce defined. If you don't do that, you cannot claim to have added anything beyond what Peirce said. If your conclusion differs from his in any way, you are claiming to be a better semeiotican than Peirce was. And frankly, I don't believe that you are. John
----------------------------- 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 .
