Gary R, list My focus remains on the pragmaticist and objective idealism zone. I do consider that references to god are religious - and after all, religion does deal specifically with the metaphysical and cosmological - and I don’t want to go into a religious discussion since I consider its axioms are and must be, beliefs -- and outside of pragmaticism.
Although - if we were to analyze god as ‘Mind’ - as Peirce suggests, then, I could see the value of such a discussion - because Mind does not have any agential attributes, as far as I understand, but is instead, an organizing principle made up of the three categories - which are firmly rooted in the objective world. Edwina. > On Oct 25, 2024, at 11:05 PM, Gary Richmond <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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] > <mailto:[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 >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt >> <http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt> >> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 5:54 PM Edwina Taborsky <[email protected] >> <mailto:[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 <https://cspeirce.com/> and, just as well, at >> https://www.cspeirce.com <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] <mailto:[email protected]> . >> ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] >> <mailto:[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.
