Jeff and Dan, JBD> I don't yet see how a phenomenological analysis would differ from a strictly logical analysis. In routine cases, scientists accept their observations as data without doing a detailed analysis of the the light upon their subject, the light reflected or generated by their subject, the effect it has on their retina, and any subtle differences between their impressions and their descriptions of those impressions. But note the unusual amount of detail in Peirce's description in the first page of Chapter 1 of http://jfsowa.com/peirce/PRexcerpts.pdf . Then look at his distinction between noumenal light and phenomenal light on page 2. Then look at the careful descriptions of his methods of recording and analyzing his observations. Modern scientists go to such detail only in cases where observation is especially difficult or novel -- for example, in the design of experiments for detecting gravitational waves from distant galaxies. JBD> phenomenological analysis: drinking wine, reading literature or interpreting a scientific treatise. Drinking wine is a good example. There are several different levels of detail: The most common is the experience of enjoying a good wine with dinner. Closer attention to the experience would be a wine-tasting party. Even closer attention to detail would be an expert vintner who is evaluating subtle differences in the wines from different fields in the same estate. But none of those get to the level of a neuroscientist who is evaluating sensations produced by different aspects of an experience at millisecond time points. From reading the PRexcerpts, what level would you think Peirce was hoping to achieve. DE> in the Piraha language of Brazil, the word ibipiio (omitting tones and glottal stop) indicates something just entering or leaving perception. A very important concept in their value of immediacy of experience. I was largely unaware of Peirce and phaneroscopy when I originally wrote about this. That is an interesting example. But I would ask about the "something" that is entering perception. Is it a pure quality, such as the color blue (a quality)? That would be a Firstness, but as soon as they say "a blue partch), it's already a Secondness. Since I don't know Piraha, I'll ask about Russian, a less exotic language whose tenses are quite different from English. The verb pit' (to drink) is imperfective. It has a past (I drank), a present (I am drinking), and a future (I will drink). But the verb vypit' (drink up) is perfective. It has a past (I drank up) and a future (I will drink up). But it doesn't have a present tense because the time between "I am drinking" and "I drank up" is an instant. Question: How immediate is the Piraha notion of immediacy? Do they allow enough time for a sentence? John
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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.
