Jon, Edwina, Helmut, List,

Jon wrote:

[W]hat Peirce associates directly with pragmatism is
abduction/retroduction--*ampliative *reasoning, "the only logical operation
which introduces any new idea" . . . According to him, the transcendent
reality of God as *Ens necessarium* is a highly plausible metaphysical
hypothesis (not a religious belief) to explain the co-reality of the three
universes (and corresponding categories) that together encompass any and
all observable phenomena.


Allow me to amplify this a bit, Jon. I would suggest that Peirce sees God
not as the creator of distinct elements in the cosmos, but as the unifying
principle that is necessary for the three universes to come into being and,
further, guaranteeing that the phenomena which follow from them are
interrelated. This surely aligns with his synechism for it implies that
reality is not a collection of isolated parts but, rather, an
interconnected whole in space and time.

And by offering God as a 'highly plausible hypothesis' he makes clear that,
at least in his view (with which, of course, I agree), such a metaphysical
question is indeed subject to inquiry just as other scientific hypotheses
are (recalling that for Peirce metaphysics *is* a theoretical science).
Positing God as *Ens necessarium* is a metaphysical context first concerned
with forming a reasonable, plausible hypothesis which might explain aspects
of the observable universe such as the role of the Three Universes (and,
so, the three categories) in its structure and the extent to which signs
appear to perfuse that structure.

Of course, from the scientific standpoint, offering a plausible hypothesis
is only the beginning of a complete scientific inquiry. There are then
close observations to be made, deducing what follows from the hypothesis in
relation to these observations for the express purpose of devising tests,
and finally the metaphysical equivalent devising inductive experiments to
see to which extent the hypothesis is confirmed (or not). Here too, as in
semeiotics, it is my opinion that Peirce should be seen as a
'backswoodsman', as a pioneer, exploring a vast, unknown intellectual
landscape.

Peirce's closely associating abduction with pragmatism shows him committed
to exploring metaphysical ideas with logical and scientific rigor, even
inquiring into that which might be considered the ultimate metaphysical
idea in one of the three branches he outlines in his 'Classification of the
Sciences'. And his tentative conclusion there would seem to be that God, as*
Ens necessarium*, is not a mere "abstract concept" but a necessary
principle for explaining the reality of the universe, its semiotic nature,
the roles and relations of the Three Universes, and the continuity of if it
all, even in -- perhaps especially in -- its evolution. To the extent that
Peirce's God is 'benevolent;, as he states be believes God to be at the
head of the N.A., it also serves as the underlying principle of
evolutionary love.

Best,

Gary R

On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 9:47 PM Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]>
wrote:

> List:
>
> Like I said, one can certainly reject the first premiss of my deductive
> alternative and deem it unsound accordingly. My point in bringing it up was
> more formal than material--as demonstrated below, *any* justificatory
> rationale can be substituted for both the antecedent of the conditional
> proposition and the second premiss, with the argumentation remaining
> logically valid (not fallacious).
>
> Moreover, *every *deductive argumentation is ultimately "circular" in the
> sense that because it represents *necessary *inferences, there is nothing
> in the conclusion that is not already implied by the premisses. This is
> only problematic when the conclusion is covertly *assumed *by one of
> those premisses, such that it may be fairly described as having been
> "smuggled into" them.
>
> In any case, like I also said, what Peirce associates directly with
> pragmatism is abduction/retroduction--*ampliative *reasoning, "the only
> logical operation which introduces any new idea" (CP 5.171, EP 2:216,
> 1903). According to him, the transcendent reality of God as *Ens
> necessarium* is a highly plausible metaphysical hypothesis (not a
> religious belief) to explain the co-reality of the three universes (and
> corresponding categories) that together encompass any and all observable
> phenomena.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
> Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 5:54 PM Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> JAS, list
>>
>> You wrote:
>>
>> -if believing in God gives me intellectual satisfaction and moral
>> grounding, then I am justified in believing in God; and believing in God
>> gives me intellectual satisfaction and moral grounding; hence, I am
>> justified in believing in God.
>>
>> I consider this pragmatically empty. Replace the terms:
>>
>> IF believing that witches cause illness gives me intellectual
>> satisfaction and moral grounding [ because I know who/what to blame], THEN,
>> I am justified in believing in witches as causal of illness.
>>
>> Essentially this argument sets up, not a pragmaticist format of
>> evidentiary requirements but an entirely individual subjective and
>> emotional format. Its evidentiary ‘proof’ is circular - ie - it is
>> confined; it rests within the individual’s private emotions. As Peirce said
>> - to make individuals the locus of proof is ‘most pernicious [
>> can’t remember the site]..
>>
>> The point is - such an argumentative framework rejects scientific and
>> thus objective reasoning. It is circular - and abduction is not circular
>> but moves from multiple inductive empirical observations to form a possible
>> hypothesis.  That is the point of pragmaticism and objective idealism -
>> that these arguments are grounded in existential observations and
>> experiences. .
>>
>> Edwina
>>
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> 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