Ben & All,
We have of course discussed the bearing of Peirce's categories on his
other triads several times before, even to the point of going through
his early writings in excruciating detail. I do not think I have the
strength to do that again, but it may be possible to recover the gist
of those examinations from various archives here and there on the web.
One of the nagging things about that passage is of course that Peirce
is presenting his analysis in the form of a dialogue, which leaves us
the task of deciding how much of his own thought he is placing in the
speeches of his interlocutor and how often his dialogue partner plays
but the part of a foil for his own conclusions.
I have come to learn that there are many different ways of resolving
questions like these. I suppose I am leaning more these days toward
a particular idea -- that if there is an objective reality addressed
by each observer's mind on a matter, then we ought above all to keep
our eyes on that prize if we want to settle the question in due time.
Regards,
Jon
BU = Ben Udell
BU: The passage by Peirce that you quoted below has nagged at me for some time.
On your mywikibiz page to which you linked, as regards that passage, you
said "The first thing to extract from this passage is the fact that
Peirce's Categories, or 'Predicaments', are predicates of predicates"
BU: In the editors' footnote to CP 4.549, the editors say that what there
Peirce calls the Modes of Being are "Usually called categories by Peirce.
See vol. 1, bk. III". Maybe they're wrong, but what here he calls the
"Modes of Being" - "Actuality, Possibility, and Destiny (or Freedom from
Destiny)" do at least comprise one of his formulations of his categories,
even if not the definitive formulation.
BU: Peirce says "[...] what you have called Categories, but for which I prefer
the designation Predicaments, and which you have explained as predicates of
predicates ..." Peirce everywhere else prefers the name Categories for his
own categories and who is the "you" who would have been speaking of Peirce's
own categories?
BU: Peirce says,
CSP: [...] the divisions so obtained must not be confounded with the different
Modes of Being: Actuality, Possibility, Destiny (or Freedom from Destiny).
On the contrary, the succession of Predicates of Predicates is different
in the different Modes of Being.
BU: Where else does he say that the successions of his categories are
"different in the different Modes of Being"? Where in his other
writings does he call his own categories "predicates of predicates"?
It's hard not to think that by "Predicates of Predicates" he does not
mean his own categories, and instead that, at most, 1st-intentional,
2nd-intentional, and 3rd-intentional entities, on which he says that
his "thoughts are not yet harvested," will end up being treated by him
as Firsts, Seconds, Thirds - instances or applications of his categories.
--
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
word press blog 1: http://jonawbrey.wordpress.com/
word press blog 2: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L listserv. To
remove yourself from this list, send a message to lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with the
line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the message. To post a message to the
list, send it to PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
