BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}Jon - yes, if I understand you correctly - then, yes, semiosis
generates regulative principles but as to whether these are
'abductive hopes' - hmm. I agree with the 'abductive' - but- does the
Universe actually 'hope'?  I think I'd prefer the term ' Will', with
Will understood only as the Will-to-Generate the semiosic triad.

        Edwina
 On Tue 19/05/20 12:25 PM , Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net sent:
 Edwina, All ... 
 In the many, many discussions we've had along these lines over the
last couple of decades I think it's most commonly  
 been understood that such convergence theses amount to regulative
principles, in effect falling into the category of  
 abductive hopes. 
 Regards, 
 Jon 
 On 5/19/2020 8:09 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: 
 >    
 >  
 >  Robert, Gary F, list - with regard to concerns about the concept
of 
 > a  'predestination' identity of something, i.e., the notion of a 
 > 'final truth' about this 'thing' - I question whether such an
agenda 
 > is the 'nature of  Peircean semiosis'. 
 >  
 >  Whether one assumes that truth is a fact or an ideal - both 
 > assumptions include the view that 'truth' exists about this
'thing'. 
 > Now, in some instances of semiosis, we can indeed accept that
there 
 > is a truth vs a non-truth. For example, in the identity of a
poison; 
 > in the factual nature of an historical event. 
 >  
 >  But surely this is not definitive of the full nature of Peircean 
 > semiosis. Did he spend all his years and work merely writing that
'if 
 > you or a group work hard enough - you'll find out the truth of
whether 
 > X is a poison or the truth of what happened'.... 
 >  
 >  This notion of an almost predestined reality of a 'thing'. which
can 
 > never change...seems to me to function only within pure Thirdness.
 It 
 > ignores the brute accidents and changes of Secondness and totally 
 > ignores the chance novelties introduced by Firstness. That is, it 
 > ignores evolution and adaptation and novelty. 
 >  
 >  I consider that - apart from these factual situations of
'either-or' 
 > [is it a poison or not; did this event occur or not]  ….that 
 > Peircean semiosis rejects a predestined Truth. Indeed, with the
power 
 > of Secondness and Firstness - Peircean semiosis rejects
predestination 
 > of any kind and sets up the world as complex, interactive, dynamic
and 
 > open to pure novelty, There is no 'final truth'. 
 >  
 >  Edwina 
 >  
-----------------------------
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 .




Reply via email to