Yes - I like that outline by Peirce as well. The first stage if we can call it that, after 'nothing', is chaos [Firstness] and then, the second stage is Thirdness where Mind begins to take charge and develop habits of organization - which permit the discrete 'bits' of Secondness to actually exist for more than a nanosecond, and, to reproduce as types [whether as chemical molecules or as cells].
Firstness continues within Thirdness; and therefore, there cannot be a final state of pure habits. Edwina On Fri 26/06/20 2:59 PM , Auke van Breemen peirce-l@list.iupui.edu sent: Edwina, With regard to the estimate of final stage I always am of the opinion that we can only reasonably discuss it afterwards as to its true nature. I have no religious inclinations, but can have sympathy with certain religious expressions. I do like Spinoza's naturalization of god. What I did value in Peirce's estimate is this fragment: We exist in time, which is thesecond stageof cosmological evolution, that of thirdness, characterized by both regularity (laws) and diversity (spontaneity and "chance"). As the universe evolves, laws and habits develop and become more and more regular. What was originally spontaneity becomes law. But new spontaneities continue to arise, increasing the variety of the world (Peirce, 1931-1935, 6.101). It is an improvement on Spinoza, a process approach. best, Auke Op 26 juni 2020 om 17:05 schreef Edwina Taborsky : Auke, list Thanks for the link and the interesting comments about the artistic process. My comment is only about the cosmological outline, and of course reflects my own view. As an atheist, I have a problem with the anthropomorphic transformation of 'Mind' [which is a term Peirce also uses to refer to 'god' ] to the term of 'God', which is a term overloaded with anthropomorphic meanings, including agency, predetermined goals, interventionism, etc. But my other quibble is her suggestion that the final stage is one of Secondness. My view of Secondness is that it functions within individual particles, ie, 'bits of matter' - and as such finite entities, will always be undergoing dissipation [unless time also stops] . My understanding of the final stage is instead, 'the complete induration of habit reducing the free play of feeling and the brute irrationality of effort to complete death'. 6.201. This refers to Thirdness. However, as noted in 6.148, "habits would become wooden and ineradicable, and no room being left for the formation of new habits, intellectual life would come to a speedy close...." But - Peirce reminds us that 'There always remains a certain amount of spontaneity in its action, without which it would be dead" 6.148. Edwina On Fri 26/06/20 7:30 AM , Auke van Breemen peirce-l@list.iupui.edu sent: John, A good summary of Peirce's take on esthetics is to be found at: http://www.signosemio.com/peirce/esthetics.asp [1] A nice feat of the description is that it contains some fine remarks on Peirce's conception of God. In the end, I think, that Peirce could regard any work on art less feeble only if three aspects are explicated in the study: 1. The quality of the artwork in itself 2. the way in which (or adequacy) it expresses qualities of feelings 3. the way in which it adresses (effectiveness) its interpretant thought. and discussed in their interrelation with each other in any case study. best, Auke Op 25 juni 2020 om 19:20 schreef "John F. Sowa" : Iris and Jerry R, The question of what Peirce knew or thought about deriving ethics from esthetics is problematical. He analyzed issues of science and logic to such a great depth, that his knowledge of esthetics would seem trivial by comparison, at least to himself. But before claiming that Peirce was incompetent about esthetics or ethics, we should compare his writings to someone who was more competent. Who might that be? Iris> Jerry Rhee asks, "Is it not obvious that Peirce was incompetent for the task imposed upon him of defining the esthetically good?" In some ways, I think he might be right: it's easier to ask questions about the pragmatic trivium as it relates to today's world than to find satisfying answers in Peirce's writings. Yes. Questions are very important. The greatest philosophers of all time have been asking such questions. Has anyone found answers about the normative sciences that are more satisfying than Peirce's? Who? CP 2.197> We shall next take up the logic of the normative sciences, of which logic itself is only the third, being preceded by Esthetics and Ethics. It is now forty-seven years ago that I undertook to expound Schiller's Aesthetische Briefe to my dear friend, Horatio Paine. We spent every afternoon for long months upon it, picking the matter to pieces as well as we boys knew how to do. In those days, I read various works on esthetics; but on the whole, I must confess that, like most logicians, I have pondered that subject far too little. The books do seem so feeble. CP has 129 passages about esthetics. He said that he read various works on the subject, but he found those books "so feeble". Can anyone point to books that are not "feeble" according to the standards that Peirce set for himself? 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 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 [2] . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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 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 [3] . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by The PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell. Links: ------ [1] http://www.signosemio.com/peirce/esthetics.asp [2] http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm [3] 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 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.