"Edwina Taborsky" <tabor...@primus.ca>
wrote:
List
What disagreement with Peirce? My point was to examine the quotes by Peirce, selected by both JAS and Auke. They focused on different definitions of reality and truth.
I don't think that the differences can be defined as between 'those which are verbal' vs 'those which are pragmatic'. Both acknowledge that a real object is 'real' - regardless of 'what you or I may think about it' 5.432. So, how do I see the difference?
The JAS selections focus on the requirement, I think, for an additional step to define 'the real'; namely, an investigation, 'by all who investigate', that concludes that this object is truthfully represented 'in this opinion'.
The quotes provided by JAS are indicative of the scientific method .The intentionality, if I may use the term, of dealing with these objects rests within the mankind-who-investigate. Reality is defined as that-which is-true after our investigations.
But Auke's quotes show us a different aspect of reality, apart from its being, after investigation, defined as true. His quotes - and I emphasize that both JAS and Auke provided Peircean quotes ... puts some intentionality - an inaccurate word I admit - upon reality; namely, that 'the reality of things consists in their persistent forcing themselves upon our recognition'.
That's what is interesting in these definitions of reality; one definition defines it as the result of OUR actions of investigation and our evaluation of these investigations; the other definition defines it as the result of the external world's persistence in interaction with us.
Both are obviously valid. I'm not sure how I would term or define the two approaches.
Edwina
On Thu 17/06/21 9:59 AM , Jon Alan Schmidt jonalanschm...@gmail.com sent:
Edwina, Auke, List:I appreciate the honest acknowledgment of disagreement with Peirce. However, nothing that I quoted from him "relies on man to define truth." There is no inconsistency whatsoever between his definitions of reality at the second and third grades of clarity, which I summarize as follows.
- Verbal definition of reality - that which is as it is regardless of what anyone thinks about it.
- Pragmatistic definition of reality - that which would be affirmed in the ultimate opinion after infinite inquiry by an infinite community.
Note that the latter describes a regulative ideal, not an actual achievement, so it does not rely on man to define truth (or reality) at all. It simply expresses the "cheerful hope" that our investigations of reality, if carried out far enough in a sincere spirit of seeking the truth, would eventually be self-correcting. For more on this, I once again highly recommend Robert Lane's recent book, Peirce on Realism and Idealism (https://books.google.com/books/about/Peirce_on_Realism_and_Idealism.html?id=yKpCDwAAQBAJ).As for Auke's post quoted below, I agree completely with Gary F.'s response (https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2021-06/msg00126.html ).Regards,Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USAStructural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran ChristianOn Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 8:12 AM Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote:List
I think that Auke has brought up a vital analysis of 'what is reality'.
JAS provided us with Peirce quotations that asserted that 'what is true' is reality. I have a problem with such a definition, because it relies on man to define truth and I consider allotting mankind such a role is problematic. [indeed, dare I say, almost nominalistic].
I prefer the Peirce quotations selected by Auke, which put reality out of the control of man's thoughts and return it to the external world.
And as Auke added: "Real is that what is independent of individual thought" [And I'd even add, of many individual thoughts for the collective can be wrong]. Auke adds: "it is because of this independence of individual thought that we can talk about the truth of propositions. Or the veracity of a phanerosocpic exercise".
Agreed; thanks.
Edwina
On Thu 17/06/21 2:08 AM , "Auke van Breemen" peirce-l@list.iupui.edu sent:
Jon,
CP 1. 175 The reality of things consists in their persistent forcing themselves upon our recognition.
CP 1.325 In the idea of reality, Secondness is predominant; for the real is that which insists upon forcing its way to recognition as somethingotherthan the mind's creation.
This quote comes from your recent reponse to Edwina:
CSP: That which any true proposition asserts is real , in the sense of being as it is regardless of what you or I may think about it. (CP 5.432, EP 2:343, 1905)
And here we see what the relation is between propositions and reality.
In short: Real is that what is independed of individual thought. And it is because of this independence of individual thought that we can talk about the truth of propositions. Or the veracity of a pheneroscopic excercize.Best,
Auke
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
