Edwina, The misunderstanding is probably mine. Trichotomies are the sub-categories. Within the classification of sciences the order is: esthetics, ethics and logic. It is the scientific context. With society I am inclined to order thus: esthetics, logic, ethics. But indeed it is not the functional action that changes.
best, Auke Op 9 maart 2021 om 17:00 schreef Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]>: > > > Auke, list > > I wonder if we are misinterpreting each other. > > By 'context' with regard to the categories, what bothers me is that I > don't feel that the nature or functional actions of the category changes > according to context. That is, 1ns remains as Firstness; 2ns as 2ns, 3ns as > 3ns. I don't see that their actions change whether one uses the categories > within a cenoscopic research [ie, theoretical] versus an idioscopic [ie > objective experimental of specific situations/things]. > > Now - what am I misunderstanding? > > Edwina > > > On Tue 09/03/21 10:37 AM , "Auke van Breemen" > [email protected] sent: > > > > > > 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. > > > > > >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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.
