List, Jon: > On Apr 16, 2024, at 1:10 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > HR: But all this doesn´t mean, that between parallel classes (such as icon, > index, symbol) there is a gradient instead of a sharp distinction. > > According to Peirce, one sign can be more or less iconic, indexical, or > symbolic than another sign--especially since all symbols involve indices and > icons, and all indices involve icons. Moreover, a sign can be predominately > iconic while still having indexical and symbolic aspects, or predominately > indexical while still having symbolic aspects. On the other hand, both tones > as "indefinite significant characters" and types as "definitely significant > Forms" are embodied in tokens, such that every type involves tokens (its > instances) and every token involves tones. Most (maybe all) of the other > eight trichotomies in Peirce's 1906-1908 taxonomies are sharp distinctions, > although the necessitant typically involves the existent and the possible, > and the existent involves the possible. For example, every sign must be > either a seme, a pheme, or a delome; but all delomes involve phemes and > semes, and all phemes involve semes.
Returning to the 1868 metaphysical definition of substance, one can attempt to ascribe names to substances following the rhetorical guidance that would presumably follow from the agency of these manufactured descriptors. Note the three distinctions that CSP hypotheses for his metaphysics. For example, I could attempt to assign the names of the ordered sequence of saturated hydrocarbons, methane, ethane, propane, butane, pentane, hexane, septane, octane, nonane, decane, and so forth. (It is probable that CSP was aware of the relative compositions of these (the first ten) saturated hydrocarbons.). The molecular formula are given by the general formula, C(n)H(2n+2). Each of these substances has properties related to temperature, such as melting point or boiling point and flammability. Each of these substances has a graph, a specific graph of the arrangement of the (n) + (2n+2) atoms in a pattern that was determined by methodologies of chemical ANALYSIS and SYNTHESIS. Furthermore, in the late 1890’s, CSP produced a research article on acetylene, a related hydrocarbon that indicated he was knowledgable of the state of the art. Can you create any correlates between the categories ( 9, or 10, or 66 or any other integer) of the semantics you appear to believe in? Or, are semantics merely rhetoric semantics for the sake of argument that can not be related to substances? More generally, from a philosophical point of view, when and how will such terminology generate the agency need for pragmatic work of symbolic agency? Cheers Jerry
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► 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.
