List,
I followed without intervening in the debates on André de Tienne's slides. The initiative is interesting because one spends a long time in a frame, breaking with the only particular reactions of the present. Taking the time to discuss step by step on a constructed presentation can be eminently profitable to the collective progress. Each one can bring his stone or his nuance in a climate of mutual respect. Observation shows that this is not the case. The cause of this is, in my opinion, that from the beginning, the first slide introduces a characterized bias. Indeed, the discussion is biased by the proposal to choose André de Tienne's idiosyncratic approach as a framework. It has not really been discussed. It imposes the entry into the Peircean system of thought through phaneroscopy presented as a science of observation without any prior foundation. It would be made possible by the capacity granted to any mind to prescind universal categories in any phaneron, i.e., in everything that is in front of the mind. We can immediately observe that if the mind can prescind universal categories in any phaneron, they are already there (CP 1.353). Indeed, "The categories are mostly combined in the observables; to separate them, the human mind operates by "dissociation," "prescission," and "distinction." It is a process that works like chemical analysis, a kind of "cracking" that dissociates the molecules to highlight the atoms that constitute it and then distinguish the constituents" (auto citation, see the links below). If there is a mystification to be mentioned, it may be here! De Tienne's idiosyncrasy consists of recognizing the pre-eminent place of mathematics in Peirce's thought to better exclude it by confining it, along with mathematicians, to their field. I support this judgment in the preprint that I have just put online. I extract just this quote (among others): *Every systematic philosopher must provide himself a classification of the sciences. Comte first proposed to arrange the sciences in a series of steps, each leading another. This general idea may be adopted, and we may adapt our phraseology to the image of the well of truth with flights of stairs leading down into it:* *We divide the whole into three great parts:* * - mathematics, the study of ideal constructions without reference to their real existence, - empirics, the study of phenomena with the purpose of identifying their forms with those mathematics has studied,* * - pragmatics, the study of how we ought to behave in the light of the truths of empirics.* (Peirce, MS 1345, undated, transcription 1976: NEM, III.2, 1122) [emphasize mine] In short, to confer on phaneroscopy, without mystification, the status of science, we must be collectively capable of identifying mathematical forms with forms resulting from the abstractive observation of phanerons and, for that, it is necessary of course that these forms are already there in the mind of the observers. Not to make mathematics "the unseen character"(in french "L'arlésienne") is a prerequisite for any healthy discussion. Otherwise, one will open the way to a war of extermination between clans in the depths of the "well of truth." In such battles, "the reason of the stronger is always the best." (PDF) The "Podium" of Universal Categories and their degenerate cases (researchgate.net) <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352641475_The_Podium_of_Universal_Categories_and_their_degenerate_cases> *https://www.academia.edu/49325877/The_Podium_of_Universal_Categories_and_their_degenerate_cases <https://www.academia.edu/49325877/The_Podium_of_Universal_Categories_and_their_degenerate_cases>* Sincerely, Robert Marty Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty *https://martyrobert.academia.edu/ <https://martyrobert.academia.edu/>* Le lun. 21 juin 2021 à 23:34, <g...@gnusystems.ca> a écrit : > Continuing our slow read, here is the next slide of André De Tienne’s > slideshow posted on the Peirce Edition Project (iupui.edu) > <https://peirce.iupui.edu/publications.html#presentations> site. > > > > Gary f. > > > > > > Text: > > Necessary assumption for the purposes of this talk: > > You are already minimally familiar with Peirce's three categories of > firstness, secondness, and thirdness. > > • 1864-1867: Initial search for a new conception of the logical role a set > of genuinely universal categories should fulfill > > - Discovery that this set is small and *gradually ordered*. > > - Each category is a distinct and indispensable *stage* in the process of > turning a cloudy *manifold* into a clarified unifying intellection. > > - Each category is found *inductively* and confirmed through the test of > *PRESCISSION*, a powerful kind of heuristic abstraction. > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > ► 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.
