Edwina, You wrote:
1] I'm very hesitant to bring in the attribute of 'context' to analysis of the categories. I consider them universal forces - and am cautious that 'context' reduces them to relativistic forces. For the cenoscopic list I agree, but I think that ideoscopic categories arise by the introduction of context. Auke Op 9 maart 2021 om 15:09 schreef Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]>: > > Mike, list > > Thanks for your comments - and - A few more comments: > > 1] I'm very hesitant to bring in the attribute of 'context' to analysis > of the categories. I consider them universal forces - and am cautious that > 'context' reduces them to relativistic forces. > > You wrote: " 3ns is the future both because of its prescissive logic, and > it represents the continuous whole to which the cosmos is equilibrating. In > contrast, for local circumstances and objects, the generalizing continuity is > towards habit acquisition, not necessarily a time construct such as the > future" > > As for the notion of 'future' - since, as I understand it, the Peircean > future is open and abductive rather than determined, then I'm not sure that > there is a 'continuous whole' in the future. And habit acquisition is in > itself, open, even in its own actions of trying to restrict this openness! > The incredible nature of Thirdness is that there are three modes! 3-3, 3-2 > and 3-1. That inserts both actions: those of communal stability and those of > local open contextuality. That ensures both stability and openness... > > 2] Yes, I prefer the 'umbrella-spoke' as an image of the triad. Peirce > himself used it...1.347]. The thing about the umbrella spoke is that it can > show how an Interpretant Relation can move into becoming an Object Relation > in another triad. And, it shows that no triad is isolate; all are networked > into a complex system.. > > 3] You wrote: " Three others, close to the root of the root, that also > give me a great deal of difficulty are 'space', 'time', and 'light' > (photons). I tend to view 'light' at the actual transition between 1ns and > 2ns, with both 'time' and 'space' following in 2ns thereafter: > > Agree. With regard to time, as you know, I prefer Matsuno's analysis. As > for space - difficult; As you know, following the analysis of Atmanspacher, > I've divided space into four key zones expressed by the Relations: internal > local 1-1; internal global 3-2; and external local 2-2 and external global > 3-1. That leaves me with the problem of what I call the 'interface relation' > of 2-1 which is both internal and external - and 3-3 which I view as aspatial > and atemporal. > > That is, I consider the six Peircean Relations as operating within > specific attributes of both space and time. > > With regard to 'light', I'd consider it free energy. > > Edwina > > >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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 no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
