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.
