Helmut - I think you've fallen into your own definitional trap.
The Peircean triad doesn't mean that there are three options [ie
black, white and gray]. The Peircean triad is an irreducible process,
where the middle term is an action-of-mediation. Not a third option.
And I don't see what this triadic process has to do with 'homophobia
and transphobia'.
Nor would I define a conservative perspective as 'binary'. I would
define a closed perspective as...closed - and its opinions could be
binary or completely relativistic and anarchistic. After all, the
so-called 'progressives' can be as rigid and unyielding in their
relativism as any so-called conservative. I would define an open
perspective as - open to change. That's all.
Edwina
On Sun 22/11/20 10:59 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
List, As Peircean semiotics is a three-valued logic, I think it
bears relevance for the discussion about multiple-valued logic. But I
have the impression, that multipleness is sometimes explained away by
just adding a "maybe" to the values "yes" and "no" (e.g.
Lukasiewicz). I think, this is wrong. I think, multipleness comes
from more than one dimension of (binary) polarities being relevant
for one problem. If a problem is analysed by more than one dimension
of polarities, it can be shown, that the logic, the problem depends
on, is tri- or more- adic. According to Peirce and others, a
more-than-three-adicity can be reduced to three-adicities, but a
three-adicity cannot always, or can hardly ever, be reduced to
binarities. I would say, when different polarities create a
triadicity, which from then on cannot be reduced back to them, this
is an emergence. A polarity is logically an easy thing to grasp,
and a traidicity is not. So this emergence often brings with it a
feeling of loss of control, and anger. This is an explanation for
homophobia and transphobia: The conservative concept of sexuality
is male-female, so binary, like black-white, hot-cold, right-wrong,
up-down, open-closed, well-unwell. When somebody claims for
him*herself to belong to a third gender, conservative people see,
that this way their world is made more complicated and harder to
grasp, they feel a loss of control, and blame this person for
deliberately being the reason for that. The reason for sexuality
being not binary anymore is, that in an open society there are more
than one polarity-dimensions now. One dimension is the biological
male-female distinction (the sex), another dimension is the social
dimension (the gender): What sex do I want to be, and the third
dimension is the attraction: Which sex am I attracted to for having
as a partner. A fourth dimension is, do I care about sex at all, or
am rather tired of the whole topic. I just have mentioned this
example due to its obvious relevance in contemporary discussions, but
there are many more examples in nowadays culture, e.g. the
rightism-leftism-discussion. Today it is not so easy anymore to
distinguish between what is rightist and what leftist, like it was in
former decades. Well, I just wanted to propose looking at all these
things sensibly, with using adicy-models and the concept of emergence
and irreducibility of triads. I have the feeling, that a triadic view
is opposed to digitalism, which, with its binary 1-0-distinction in
the small transistor-scale just creates polarities, fiter bubbles,
hatred, in the large scales of communication too. Best, Helmut
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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.
