Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Terms, Propositions, Arguments (and "The union of units unites the unity.")

> On Nov 19, 2015, at 2:49 PM, Clark Goble wrote: > >>> On Nov 19, 2015, at 1:19 PM, Jerry LR Chandler >> > wrote: >>> >>> I find CSP to be rather inconsistent with regard to the deeper >>> philosophical structures of mathematics and

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Terms, Propositions, Arguments

> On Nov 20, 2015, at 9:02 AM, Jon Awbrey wrote: > > Taking rational-ism (as rational-doesm) to be a perspective on the care and > feeding of rational concepts and not some Apotheosis of Reason with a Capital > “R”, one of the forks in the road where Peirce really does

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Terms, Propositions, Arguments and "The union of units unites the unity."

> On Nov 19, 2015, at 2:03 PM, Jerry LR Chandler > wrote: > > On Nov 19, 2015, at 2:42 PM, Clark Goble wrote: > >> Peirce just doesn’t see the whole universe in those terms unlike Leibniz or >> Spinoza. > > Your judgment is hard for me accept. > > I could argue

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Terms, Propositions, Arguments and "The union of units unites the unity."

> On Nov 20, 2015, at 11:16 AM, Clark Goble wrote: > > I should note that this paper of Parker’s is tied to his book on Peirce, The > Continuity of Peirce’s Thought. It’s an interesting introduction to Peirce as > well as a focus on Peirce’s notion of continuity. I find it

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Terms, Propositions, Arguments

I wrote and Clark replied: I think that rationalism normally and traditionally means accepting that there are truths that can be known a priori that are not merely matters of convention. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems like those are two separate claims and they must be

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Terms, Propositions, Arguments and "The union of units unites the unity."

Just to add to that discussion of the problem of metaphysical origins of continuity and quanta (integers). It’s from Jerome Havenel’s “Peirce’s Clarifications of Continuity.” First a quote from Peirce. In Spencer’s phrase the undifferentiated differentiates itself. The homogeneous puts on

SV: [PEIRCE-L] [biosemiotics:8949] Re: Terms, Propositions, Arguments

Dear Clark As I understand it Peirce’s God develops according to Agapism or the growth of love and reasonability. Here he has some similarity to Neoplatonism, but it is a universal philosophy of a religion of love combining mystical Buddhism and Christianity. Best Søren Fra:

Re: [PEIRCE-L] [biosemiotics:8949] Re: Terms, Propositions, Arguments

> On Nov 20, 2015, at 12:03 PM, Søren Brier wrote: > > As I understand it Peirce’s God develops according to Agapism or the growth > of love and reasonability. Here he has some similarity to Neoplatonism, but > it is a universal philosophy of a religion of love combining

Re: [PEIRCE-L] [biosemiotics:8949] Re: Terms, Propositions, Arguments

> On Nov 20, 2015, at 1:01 PM, Søren Brier wrote: > > I agree but Peirce is integrating it with an emptiness ontology inspired by > Buddhism. Hartshorne describes it as his Buddhisto-Christianism. Bishop > writes a paper on Peirce and Eastern Thought. See my > Pure Zero

[PEIRCE-L] RE: Terms, Propositions, Arguments

Hello Jon, Lists, You point to the two passages from Descartes's Principles. Both contain nice, clear expressions of how Descartes proposes to proceed in inquiry. If we take the clearest case first, which is that of mathematical inquiry (and not inquiry in philosophy), then where do