Gary F., List:
I suggest that we interpret that particular statement in light of what
comes right before it.
CSP: Finally, as what anything really is, is what it may finally come to be
known to be in the ideal state of complete information, so that reality
depends on the ultimate decision of the community; so thought is what it
is, only by virtue of its addressing a future thought which is in its value
as thought identical with it, though more developed. In this way, the
existence of thought now depends on what is to be hereafter; so that it has
only a potential existence, dependent on the future thought of the
community. (CP 5.316, EP 1:54-55, 1868)
Note that Peirce wrote the article in which these quotes appear ("Some
Consequences of Four Incapacities") at age 28, not 18. He is contrasting
the *individual *human, "apart from his fellows," with "the community"
whose *collective *thought would "be in the ideal state of complete
information" after infinite inquiry and thus would know "what anything
really is." This is the *telos *of the ongoing process of semiosis that
Richard Kenneth Atkins calls "cognitive welding" in his 2016 book, *Peirce
and the Conduct of Life: Sentiment and Instinct in Ethics and Religion*.
To the extent that each of us suffers from "ignorance and error," we have a
"separate existence" from the continuum of Truth that is represented in
existential graphs by the sheet of assertion. Again, whether this
"negation" is "symmetrical by composition" or unsymmetrical depends on
whether excluded middle holds, such that every proposition is either true
or false; and Peirce states plainly, "This assumption ... I consider
utterly unwarranted, and do not believe it" (NEM 3:758, 1893). That is why
"Triadic Logic does not *conflict *with Dyadic Logic; only, it recognizes,
what the latter does not" such that "Triadic Logic is universally true" (R
339:515[344r], 1909).
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 6:59 AM <g...@gnusystems.ca> wrote:
> Thanks, Jon Alan, I think I’m aboard this train of thought, although it’s
> taking me into unfamiliar territory.
>
> I hadn’t really considered that a relation of negation can be either
> symmetrical or asymmetrical. I wonder which case applies to this early (18)
> remark of Peirce’s: “The individual man, since his separate existence is
> manifested only by ignorance and error, so far as he is anything apart from
> his fellows, and from what he and they are to be, is only a negation”
> (EP1:55, CP 5.317). Either? Both? Neither?
>
> Gary f.
>
> } Judge not, that ye be not judged. [Matthew 7:1] {
>
> https://gnusystems.ca/wp/ }{ living the time
>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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.
