Edwina, Jon A., List: Names do matter, and the alleged risk of conceptualism/nominalism is a red herring. When the kinds of questions being investigated are "What terms did Peirce use and what did they mean for him?" or "What was Peirce's conceptual framework?" or "How did Peirce analyze the universe?" then we must study his writings as the reality, or at least as the only available means of accessing the reality. When the kinds of questions being investigated are "What terms are commonly used now and what do they mean?" or "What conceptual framework best matches the current data?" or "How should we analyze the universe today?" then we must study the objective world as the reality. The answers to the first set of questions need not *constrain *the answers to the second, but they can certainly *inform *them, as long as we recognize and acknowledge the differences rather than conflating them.
Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 8:47 AM Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Jon,list > > Yes, I do think you are right to make such a differentiation. Names don't > matter... > > But I think that any 'corpus literalism' whether early or late, runs the > risk of moving into conceptualism/nominalism, using the text as the > 'reality' rather than the objective world about which he wrote - as the > reality. > > And as you say - the revolutions in thought - which I agree with you were > already active - were an integral part of Peirce's full corpus, and his > theories, in my view, fit well into these movements, which include quantum > theory, complex dynamics, molecular biology, and societal and economic > complex dynamics etc. > > Edwina > > On Sat 13/06/20 9:04 AM , Jon Awbrey [email protected] sent: > > Edwina, Robert, Peirce List ... > > I think we have to distinguish “late corpus literalism” — I'll let that go > till I find a better name for it — from “full corpus reading of Peirce's > technical works placing them in the context of mathematical developments, > indeed revolutions, already proceeding full tilt when he joined the fray, > to which he added many more shots heard 'round the world, as fortune would > have it all but forgotten in the years of reactionary nominalism that > followed in the aftermath, as it were” — I'll let that go until I find a > better name for it. > > Regards, > > Jon > >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
