Terry, list
I'll take a different view. Every 'action' is triadic. So, the stars
imploding is a triadic action - and I'd say it has all three
categories functional in this implosion - regardless of who saw it,
heard it or when. Other stars certainly were 'aware'.
Now - we can consider our reception of this event centuries after
the event. I consider that Robert Marty's outline of the lattice is
an excellent analytic framework for working through these steps from
first input of data to some kind of conclusion.
1] First - that human observer 'receives' this data input - as a
triadic sensation, a 'Rhematic Iconic Qualisign', ie, the triad's
three relations are all in a mode of 1ns.[1-1-1] All that this means
is that the sense data has been received. No interpretation.
2] But this first 'hit' immediately must acknowledge the
differentiation between the input external data [from the imploding
star] and the receiver. So, the experience could move into a rhematic
iconic sinsign -[1-1-2] which introduces the differentiation of 2ns as
mediator by the sinsign of 2ns.
3] Then, this moves through the human observer's system - and -
Thirdness moves in, as this individual begins to get an 'idea' of
what's going on...and the sense data becomes a Rhematic Iiconic
Legisign [the legisign is 3ns].1-1-3 which makes use of this human's
scientific experience stored in 3ns.
.- and then into a Rhematic Indexical Legisign [1-2-3] which
continues with the analysis of the actual indexical data in 2ns by
using the knowledge-based 3ns analysis [legisign]. Our individual
might end the process there...an individual interpretation of local
stimuli as referenced to a general rule.
or..might go further..and come up with a Dicent symbolic Legisign
[2-3-3]..which is viewing the input data as a conclusion of the
analysis and, eg, deciding that all this data is the 'particular
attribute of the law-of-imploding stars. It becomes a part of the
'scholarly analysis'...and can be what is reported in journals.
I hope this isn't too confusing. [Robert Marty also explains how
this path, moving from first sensate input can also go very wrong,
and can move away from the actuality of the hard data in 2ns...and
move into 'magical thinking'!
Edwina
Stars imploding long before humanity came into being and presence
on Earth (an event of 1ns) emit gravity waves [1]. Those waveforms
travel through time and space until eons upon eons later they’re
detected by a human observer on Earth (2ns) in 2015. After
confirmation and concurrence, the data and event are reported in
scientific journals (3ns). While semiotic 2ns is an (indexical?)
relation connecting the waves with the collision, semiosic 3ns
relations only began in 2015 with the human observation and reporting
thereof (EP 2.411).
Do I have that right?
Terry
From: [email protected]
On Behalf Of Edwina Taborsky
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 2:10 PM
To: Auke van Breemen ; [email protected]; [email protected];
Mauro Bertani ; Jon Alan Schmidt ; Auke van Breemen
; Mike Bergman
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Bruce's 'Twisted, Closed Loop'
Mike, list
I think we are talking past each other and possibly saying the same
thing.
Let's see....how to phrase it.
In my view, the categories are 'universal' in that they apply to all
of the universe. They are universal in that their actions don't change
according to the time, place and what is being organized /formed by
these categories. 1ns is always that burst of sensation; that
unanalyzed experience of qualities. 2ns always includes
differentiation of 'this' from 'that'. 3ns includes commonalities of
laws.
Of course, the categories do not 'exist' per se, but are
explanations of how matter is organized. In this sense - the category
of 1ns is 'contextual' in that it refers to how, for example, a cell
in interaction with another cell functions as an 'explosive burst of
unanalyzed data'. If we refer to it in the mode of 2ns, this same
cell's data burst would function as a differential force between it
and another cell. If we refer to it in the mode of 3ns, the
interaction would be one of sing that data burst to find commonality
between the two cells.
My reason for pointing out that 1ns is expressed within an
interaction [which suggest 2ns] - is that I consider that no sign
[the triad] functions in isolation. Nothing functions in isolation.
The difference between 1ns and 2ns interaction is that, in 2ns, the
two entities are 'aware' [and this does not mean intellectual
consciousness] enough to have moved into a reaction. So, in 1ns, the
cell provides an explosive burst of data. In 2ns, this data is
reacted to..again, not necessarily consciously or intellectually. A
windmill reacting to the wind is in a mode of 2ns. ..with the wind as
a burst of energy/1ns.
Now - is this what you mean by 'contextual'? I'd agree with the
'enumeration of tests' to recognize the mode..
I'd agree with the Big Bang emergence - as outlined [1.412] by
Peirce, which seems to be 1ns then the differentiation of 2ns and
then, the acknowledgment of commonalities and the development of
shared habits of organization. And yes, the components of the
proto-sign would be before matter, with matter understood as at
first operative within 2ns.
I have no problem - and perhaps I am deluding myself- with
understanding 1ns as the 'instantaneous present'. An example would be
the sensation of touching the hot stove [I admit I've just baked a
rhubarb crumble and have that experience]...but it is an experience
of pure sensation without consciousness of 'what' it is. Firstness in
this sense is an informational explosion but without any sense of
differentiation between cause and result; no sense of 'me' vs 'other;
no awareness of specifics...and I'd bet that a fair amount of
entropic dissipation of data occurs before the interaction moves into
2ns [and consciousness] of 'ouch' and..into 3ns and the conclusion
that this 'ouch' resulted from that hot baking pan.
[By the way, I don't consider the ordinality of First, Second, Third
to refer to the categories].
Again, I think we are saying the same thing...not sure...
Edwina
On Tue 09/03/21 1:18 PM , Mike Bergman [email protected] [2] sent:
Hi Edwina, Auke, List,
I am having a hard time understanding the reluctance to embrace
'context' for Peirce's universal categories. It seems to me that
except for possibly First, Second and Third, that all Peircean uses
of the universal categories are contextual. Indeed, it is the
triadic relations of a sign that even allows for the formal treatment
of 'context'.
A simple perusal of Peirce's Classification of the Sciences [3]
shows the many areas he applied the categories. (Or the 60 or so
examples I have published in Table 6-2 [4].) One of the main points
I have been arguing has been the importance -- at least to me -- for
studying these uses across contexts in order to better grok the
richness and character Peirce had in mind when referencing Firstness,
Secondness and Thirdness. This is in keeping with Peirce's guidance
for natural classification as “only an enumeration of tests by
which the class may be recognized in any one of its members.” (CP
1.223, 1902)
As to the 'force' of the universal categories, I guess I tend to try
to apply some form of 'indeterminant reductionism' to work my way back
to the most basic (root or fundamental or first) expression of the
universal categories, close to what might be the first sign to
emerge at the moment of the Big Bang. In that regard, candidates like
energy, spin, direction (propagation vector), light, or maybe waves
appear to be close to the first concepts. I feel this kind of
analysis is essential to test the 'realness' of the universal
categories in relation to modern science and whether a triadic
foundation is both sufficient and necessary to represent all of
reality. I am intrigued with Peirce's concept of information as the
area of breadth x depth, and have an instinct this may relate to
space and light. Continuity and its relation to time and space also
intrigue me. Whatever it is, I think the components of the proto-sign
should be before matter in E = mcc (also consistent with today's
standard cosmology [5]). The pool of candidates for these possible
components should be quite limited. As to what actual three
components might represent that first sign and in accord with which
category is something I have been contemplating for a few years now.
It is probably my most active area of current Peirce research.
At any rate, this assembling of concepts for 1ns, 2ns and 3ns across
instances of the use of the universal categories, including trying to
understand and use prescissive distinctions, have seemingly been
helping me understand the universal categories better. Or, perhaps,
I am just deluding myself. For example, I still find characterizing
the 'instantaneous present' as 1ns as one of the more challenging
ones.
Pointers or criticisms are heartily welcomed!
Best, Mike
On 3/9/2021 10:52 AM, Auke van Breemen wrote:
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 :
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] [6] 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 :
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] [7] .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to
[email protected] [8] 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&data=04%7C01%7C%7C531df50bb45c4fad660108d8e32efeb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509138270049622%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=TmwRntT9cCTaTtlWEFxZiD%2BIVXIM98cLZgMdDLUesMM%3D&reserved=0
[9]" target="_blank"> http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm
[10] .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary
Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
--
__________________________________________
Michael K. Bergman
Cognonto Corporation
319.621.5225
skype:michaelkbergman [11]
http://cognonto.com/&data=04%7C01%7C%7C531df50bb45c4fad660108d8e32efeb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509138270049622%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=D9Rg/PMD5kuFbsnSdAq5%2BaqqsvXUVp0MrQckLB5cvr0%3D&reserved=0
[12]" target="_blank">http://cognonto.com
http://mkbergman.com/&data=04%7C01%7C%7C531df50bb45c4fad660108d8e32efeb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509138270049622%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=wkGew0g8Bt%2BlqF8
[13]" target="_blank" td6xdgcjvcqnpk=""
clghjostou%3d&reserved='0"'>http://mkbergman.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mkbergman&data=04%7C01%7C%7C531df50bb45c4fad660108d8e32efeb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509138270059580%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=502zBWAvamp1xDhMq5U7Ku9U8W6UeQwT73Gfa0O%2ByFo%3D&reserved=0
[14]" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/in/mkbergman
__________________________________________
Links:
------
[1]
https://scitechdaily.com/violent-neutron-star-collision-sends-gravitational-waves-shuddering-through-the-fabric-of-space-and-time/#:~:text=When%20two%20neutron%20stars%20spiral,collision%20of%20two%20black%20holes.
[2]
http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(\'[email protected]\',\'\',\'\',\'\')
[3]
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classification_of_the_sciences_(Peirce)&data=04%7C01%7C%7C531df50bb45c4fad660108d8e32efeb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509138270029709%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=qPmByfUFlwGUmydEoe1mibCxdoHdpyx//dXeeYDDv38%3D&reserved=0
[4]
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://www.mkbergman.com/publications/akrp/chapter-6.pdf&data=04%7C01%7C%7C531df50bb45c4fad660108d8e32efeb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509138270039669%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=pR8d6KQPApy05hW2zZYvJXqKY0APXmrdZ9jL1cHbQHc%3D&reserved=0
[5]
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_cosmology&data=04%7C01%7C%7C531df50bb45c4fad660108d8e32efeb5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637509138270039669%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=s/2A7tWgiUfWUWF/vZB6m3HZZqFDF7An%2B1Dso0U3b/Q%3D&reserved=0
[6] http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(
[7] http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(
[8] http://webmail.primus.ca/javascript:top.opencompose(
[9] https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=<a href=
[10] http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm
[11] http://webmail.primus.ca/skype:michaelkbergman
[12] https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=<a href=
[13] https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=<a href=
[14] https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=<a href=
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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.
