Margaretha, Edwina, List Edwina is absolutely right but she committed a small lapsus clami .... it is not 1.327 but 1.347 that should be read and even 1.346 too...
"Peirce: CP 1.346 Cross-Ref:†† 346. The other premiss of the argument that genuine triadic relations can never be built of dyadic relations and of qualities is easily shown. In existential graphs, a spot with one tail -- X represents a quality, a spot with two tails -- R -- a dyadic relation.†1 Joining the ends of two tails is also a dyadic relation. But you can never by such joining make a graph with three tails.* You may think that a node connecting three lines of identity Y is not a triadic idea. But analysis will show that it is so.* I see a man on Monday. On Tuesday I see a man, and I exclaim, "Why, that is the very man I saw on Monday." We may say, with sufficient accuracy, that I directly experienced the identity. On Wednesday I see a man and I say, "That is the same man I saw on Tuesday, and consequently is the same I saw on Monday." There is a recognition of triadic identity; but it is only brought about as a conclusion from two premisses, which is itself a triadic relation. If I see two men at once, I cannot by any such direct experience identify both of them with a man I saw before. I can only identify them if I regard them, not as the very same, but as two different manifestations of the same man. But the idea of manifestation is the idea of a sign. Now a sign is something, A, which denotes some fact or object, B, to some interpretant thought, [emphasize mine] C. Peirce: CP 1.347 Cross-Ref:†† 347. It is interesting to remark that while a graph with three tails cannot be made out of graphs each with two or one tail, yet combinations of graphs of three tails each will suffice to build graphs with every higher number of tails. [image: image.png] And analysis will show that every relation which is tetradic, pentadic, or of any greater number of correlates is nothing but a compound of triadic relations. It is therefore not surprising to find that beyond the three elements of Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness, there is nothing else to be found in the phenomenon " Best regards, Robert Marty Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty *https://martyrobert.academia.edu/ <https://martyrobert.academia.edu/>* Le jeu. 7 oct. 2021 à 16:11, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> a écrit : > Margaretha > > 1] I believe I sent you a post, just after your original post to this > list, with a comment that the Peircean triad doesn't function as a triangle > but in a Y shape. > > That is, the three nodal sites of Object-Representamen/Sign - Interpretant > do not interact with each other in a triangle format, which is closed, but > within that Y shape, where the three interactions are OPEN and enable > networking with other triads. > > I think this is a vital point. Peirce himself showed the graph of these Y > shapes connecting with each other [1.327]. > > The thing about Peirce is that his analytic framework, made up of that > triadic Y interaction, which enables connections with other 'Y's...plus his > three modal categories of Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness [chance, > immediate physical connection and reason-habits] together enable a complex > adaptive system that has the capacity to self-organize and evolve. > > 2] I have used Popper to compare with Peirce - I think that Popper's > Third World has strong comparisons with Peirce's Thirdness….he even sets > it up as analogous with the biological realm of knowledge. [See his > Objective Knowledge]. And I think that Popper's emphasis on openness, as in > The Open Society, where he rejects historicism and destiny for an > essentially open and unknown complexity of interactions -- is similar to > Peirce. That is, Popper accepts chance and reason as correlates [Firstness > and Thirdness] in the development of a society. > > Edwina > > > > On Thu 07/10/21 9:48 AM , Margaretha Hendrickx mahe3...@gmail.com sent: > > List, > > How many of you are working on -- or interested in -- studying the > connection between the philosophy of Karl Popper and Charles Peirce? > > So far, I know of only one philosopher who has worked on this > intersection, the French philosopher, Christiane Chauvire. But there must > be others. > > As a footnote, my professional background is in strategic management, not > in philosophy. I am interested in Peircean philosophy, and especially his > work on semiotic triangles, given that I believe it provides some key > answers to epistemological problems in management research. > > > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > ► 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.
