Thank you sir for the nice feedback. You have stated the points that I
wrote even more clearly and forcefully than I did.

On Tue, 1 Oct, 2024, 2:07 am Gary Richmond, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Suteerth, List,
>
> Welcome to the Peirce-L forum. If you've read the notes by the founder and
> first moderator of the forum, Joe Ransdell, then you know that this is a
> very democratic place -- exactly an intellectual forum -- where both
> seasoned scholars, philosophical novices, and students are equally welcome
> should they have an interest in Peirce's work or Peirce-related topics.
> They are especially encouraged to contribute to on-going discussions, or to
> introduce new ones.
>
> Regarding your brief philosophical paragraph (in the future I'd suggest
> that, for readability, you consider breaking up long paragraphs into much
> shorter ones). For now I'll just paste some of what I wrote to you
> (slightly modified) shortly after you sent it to me off List as perhaps a
> kind of motivation for others here to discuss your thesis with you and
> others.
>
> GR: You outline what you see to be the practical consequence of the
> understanding that abstract entities -- viz., these four: moral values,
> scientific laws, educational processes, and  economic principles -- are
> *real*, even though they don't have physical existence. While this is
> well enough understood among Peirce scholars, I think your outline is of
> potential interest to some here.
>
> As to morality you argue that this understanding --  -- supports
> universal human rights and provides an objective basis for justice, thus
> potentially strengthening the moral and legal framework of societies. In 
> science
> it is an aid to investigating non-material phenomena, encouraging an ever
> more open-minded approach to understanding this aspect of reality. In
> education it emphasizes inquiry-based learning wherein authentic doubt and
> vital curiosity lead to better understanding. And finally, in economics,
> it tends to reveal the human behavioral underpinnings of economic cycles,
> suggesting that understanding feelings and actions can help in better
> predicting and managing economic outcomes.
>
> Overall, you appear to be suggesting that Peirce's philosophy aids us in
> appreciating the reality of abstract relationships and processes, promoting
> a deeper, more integrated grasp and appreciation of the world across
> disciplines.
>
>
> I agree! And I would especially like to emphasize its 'promoting a deeper,
> more integrated grasp and appreciation of the world *across disciplines*'.
> When I -- hopefully -- find the time, it is this transdisciplinary idea
> that I'd like to further explore with you.
>
> [You will notice that I modified the Subject of this thread to emphasize
> your thesis.]
>
> Gary Richmond (writing as moderator of Peirce-L)
>
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 1:11 AM suteerth vajpeyi <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  I have written a small philosophical paragraph as contribution for the
>> forum in the hope that it may help me have a fulfilling philosophical
>> discussion with other like minds.
>>               While reading Bernard Bolzano's "wissenschaftslehre" in its
>> english translation, I was bewildered by a certain remark made
>> there.Bolzano says that there are entities like "ideas in themselves", "
>> propositions in themselves" that have reality but do not actually exist !
>> What could he possibly mean by that ? How can a non-existent thing be real
>> ? I found its answer in the writings of charles s. peirce. It is important
>> to understand what these two philosophers have in mind when they speak of
>> the real and the existent. By real, Peirce means that which exists
>> independently of thought or imagination and hence anything which can be
>> objectively discovered or determined. What is existent on the other hand,
>> is what enters into relations with other things. It is related by way of
>> spatial location and temporal relation to various other things. With this
>> definition, it becomes easy to make sense of Bolzano's remark.
>> "Propositions in themselves" such as 'the gravitational force between two
>> masses varies inversely with the square of their distance' are real. They
>> can be discovered objectively but it would be absurd to say that the law of
>> gravitation exists at a particular location and time or in a certain
>> relation to other physical things.
>>             Peirce's three categories make this distinction clearer. By
>> firstness, peirce means quality, by secondness relation and by thirdness
>> representation. A quality like redness is real. It can be objectively
>> discovered. Does redness have relation to other objects? No. So it does not
>> exist in the sense just discussed. Take a relation now. A relation such as
>> 'being taller than' is impossible without two or more relata. Indeed space
>> and time are simply the discovery of relations between things determined by
>> various forms of measurement. So relations are real and exist. Finally, a
>> representation may be either real or unreal. For example, the facade of a
>> house in the form of a rectangular face serves as a representation in our
>> minds of an object which we know to have a pentagonal cross-section. If by
>> the rectangular aspect we are deceived into thinking that the house is
>> cuboidal then our representation is unreal. It cannot be discovered
>> independently by another observer standing at some other location with
>> respect to our house.
>> We can now also see why peirce seems to represent seemingly different
>> things by the terms firstness, secondness and thirdness. Other things
>> designated by these terms include possibility, reality and law. A quality
>> does not exist inspite of being real. So it is a possibility, waiting to be
>> exemplified in a specific object. Relations occur only in the outside world
>> where the relata exist. Finally a representation whether real or unreal is
>> something that will determine the future course of our actions and hence
>> become a law or habit depending on whether it is real or unreal
>> respectively. Similiarly firstness is said to be associated with feeling
>> (that is detecting qualities of things), secondness with action (changing
>> the relations of things) and thirdness with thought (as per peirce all
>> thought proceeds via using signs). Some authors (like the distinguished
>> philosopher of science - ernest nagel) have taken peirce to task in their
>> writings, arguing that what peirce exactly means by his three categories is
>> hopelessly vague. That peirce seems to divide everything un-necessarily
>> into threes. But there is method to this seeming madness. The great
>> philosopher of the twentieth century, alfred north whitehead distinguished
>> three modes of thought. The mode of presentational immediacy or feeling,
>> the mode of causal efficacy or action and the mixed mode of sign-reference
>> or thought. If one applies these three modes of thought to every possible
>> subject matter then one naturally ends up dividing things into threes. For
>> example signs which resemble their objects work by communicating a thing's
>> qualities to us, apealing to feeling and are called icons, signs which work
>> by being interlocked in a close relation with their objects, appealing to
>> action and are called indices and symbols which work by representing their
>> objects by convention or in other words by appealing to thought.
>>             Ok, now why should we be interested in this discussion? Or in
>> Peirce's words, what are the practical consequences of this small bit of
>> philosophy? Let us start with morality. Moral values are real (objectively
>> discoverable) but non-existent (because they transcend the particularities
>> of a location or an age). This means that a person's fundamental rights,
>> his right to life, property and liberty can be discovered and defended
>> independently of whether they have been granted by one's rulers or not.
>> This (the discoverability of justice) is the basis of the judiciary system
>> of our modern day democracies. Moving over to science, there was great
>> perplexity in the 19th century regarding the nature of light. For a long
>> time, scientists sought to explain electromagnetic waves as the oscillation
>> of an electric ether that was massless. People just refused to believe that
>> there could exist firstness or in other words, pure possibilities like
>> lines of electromagnetic force in a vacuum. They could not understand that
>> undulations in electromagnetic force could exist independently of whether
>> there is or is not an object affected by the force.They were two-category
>> metaphysicians. One can at this point also see why Peirce supported realism
>> as opposed to nominalism. He realised that scientific laws for example, are
>> real but non-existent. Hence universals or abstractions must be real. But
>> what about people who are not scientists or moral philosophers ? Let us
>> turn now to pedagogy. Mrs. phyllis chiasson has ably written an article for
>> the relevance of peirce's metaphysics to educational theory in the commens
>> encyclopedia. Self education and inquiry employ the same modes of thought
>> as enunciated by Peirce. First we are made aware of our ignorance by an
>> unexpected event. This makes us curious. We have a feeling of doubt. To
>> quench this doubt we come up with a hypothesis, checking it by our actions
>> except in mathematics although if we count construction of models and
>> performance of algebraic operations as actions then we have no exceptions.
>> Finally we think and modify the firmness of our beliefs accordingly along
>> with our future habits as well. Economics- economists of the keynesian
>> school vs economists of the austrian school have contrasting views on the
>> effects of mild inflation on economic growth. One side contends that mild
>> inflation has been found to be strongly associated statistically, with
>> economic growth. The other contends that the 'growth' triggered by mild
>> inflation is made up of malinvestments which when they become liquidated
>> result in a cycle of boom and bust in stock markets. Who is right ?
>> Economic laws are an example of thirdness. If we agree that the laws of
>> economics are due to the tendency of man to take up habits with each action
>> taken by a person then what actions drive the growth seen in association
>> with mild inflation ? It so happens that human beings are fond of their
>> earnings. So when they find their savings pool deteriorating in value, they
>> seek to augment their wealth to compensate the decline in value of their
>> savings. The most common way to do this is via investments. The threshold
>> for making unsafe investments gets lowered when people face inflation. It
>> also triggers people to consume their savings faster before they
>> deteriorate in value. When these malinvestments at the micro level
>> liquidate, we face a recession at the macro level. Thus we explain economic
>> laws by action and action by feelings of human beings, employing the three
>> different modes of the mind as stated by peirce and whitehead all the while
>> checking our results by observing reality.
>>
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>> 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
>> [email protected] .
>> ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to
>> [email protected] 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.
>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> 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
> [email protected] .
> ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to
> [email protected] 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.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
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 [email protected] . 
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] 
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.

Reply via email to