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