Edwina, List: ET: What I find incredible is the depth of the hostility to my words.
Substantive criticism is not an expression of hostility. ET: Again, what stuns me is the depth of the anger and vitriol. Substantive criticism is not an expression of anger and vitriol. ET: JAS insisted that all mediation is 3ns. *Peirce *insisted that all mediation is 3ns. ET: ... and asked JAS how four of the ten classes, which examine the semiosic triad, have mediation in a mode other than 3ns. This is now the third time that this question has been brought up. I directly answered it the first time, then linked to that same answer the second time, but I will try again. According to Peirce, there is no such thing as "mediation in a mode other than 3ns"; again, all mediation is 3ns by definition. The three trichotomies that result in the ten sign classes are not divisions by category *per se*, nor by "mode," but by *universe*--possible, existent, or necessitant. They are according to (1) the mode of apprehension of the sign itself, (2) the relation of the sign to its dynamical object, and (3) the relation of the sign to its final interpretant. For six of the ten classes, at least one of these is a necessitant; for the other four, all three are either possibles or existents. Nevertheless, for all ten classes, the sign always *mediates *between its dynamical object and its final interpretant, and thus paradigmatically manifests 3ns. ET: ... the quote doesn’t deny the validity of the other quotes about mind and matter. The fact that Peirce was examining the limited beliefs of a necessitarian outlook doesn’t negate that particular belief. I see that there is still no admission, let alone retraction, of *misquoting *Peirce in a way that gave the misleading impression that he was endorsing a particular view, when in fact he was explicitly repudiating it. ET: And the endless insistence by JAS that one may not use terms, such as existence, except within one meaning or terms such as input or function...that too is unreal. Instead, there is another mischaracterization of my posts. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 8:26 AM Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > What I find incredible is the depth of the hostility to my words. Gary F > uses an analogy with Trump (whom he obviously loathes, ) using such terms > as liar, deliberate disinformation etc.. when if you will read my post, the > quotes about mind do not contradict each other, ie, all show mind is > operative in matter. The 6.61 necessitarian quote refers in addition to > someone who ignores the roles of 1ns and 2ns. > > Again, what stuns me is the depth of the anger and vitriol. I am not a > liar, I am not deliberately misinforming or disinforming. > > This flare up began when Gary F asserted that I ignored the conceptual > semiosis and focused only on the physical world ...and JAS insisted that > all mediation is 3ns. My reaction, showing that I DO refer to the semiosis > of the conceptual realm (I usually don’t refer to my publications but there > are two books of mine that deal with such areas)..and asked JAS how four of > the ten classes, which examine the semiosic triad, have mediation in a mode > other than 3ns. > > Then suddenly I am accused of the most heinous of crimes, of deliberately > lying and misinforming ..when there is no evidence of such, when the quote > doesn’t deny the validity of the other quotes about mind and matter. The > fact that Peirce was examining the limited beliefs of a necessitarian > outlook doesn’t negate that particular belief. > > And the endless insistence by JAS that one may not use terms , such as > existence, except within one meaning or terms such as input or > function...that too is unreal. > > Why bother to stay on the list? Only because there are a few who are > incredible such as Robert Marty. Otherwise it would be neurotic of me to > stay when I am met with such constant hostility. > > 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.
