[PEIRCE-L] Entropy - anticipating the demise of the genocentric paradigm

Lists, In a recent tweet of his, reading between the lines, it would seem that Richard Dawkins is beginning to respond to challenges to his genocentric paradigm within the context of the second law of thermodynamics (entropy). Due to uncertainties wrt copyright, I won't include his tweet here.

[PEIRCE-L] CFP: Semiofest

http://2016.semiofest.com/2015/12/01/call-for-papers/ [image: SEMIOFEST] - SEMIOFEST 2016 - CFP - BLOG - LOCATION

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Elementary Relatives or Individual Relatives

Jon, This doesn't explain “the difference between relations proper and elementary relations” (which you said was "critically important to understand"), because the latter term is itself used in a specific "technical sense" by Peirce in the places you cite. It doesn't help to understand

RE: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe

[PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

Harmony, Linguistic and Musical   GLOSSARY   cacoglossic, adj.: exhibiting or characteristic of distorted or ungrammatical speech cacophonic, adj. < cacophony, n.: harsh or discordant sound; dissonance dialogism, n.: the principle that all utterances (and hence all

Fw: RE: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

No, I don't think there is a difference between my (loose) formulation and the way Peirce stated it. The pruport is the same, in my opinion.M.-Forwarded Message- From: Michael Shapiro Sent: Dec 3, 2015 12:31 PM To: Jeffrey Brian Downard , CSP

RE: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

Michael, List, You say: "My hero, Charles Peirce, rightly says that logic exists in the service of ethics, and ethics in the service of aesthetics." I am not able to find a place where Peirce says that one of these is in the service of another. I do, however, see where he says that one these

[PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Moving on to the first trichotomy of sign types in “Nomenclature and Divisions of Triadic Relations”: CP 2.244: According to the first division, a Sign may be termed a Qualisign, a Sinsign, or a Legisign. A Qualisign is a quality which is a Sign. It cannot actually act as a sign until it

Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Gary F - I certainly consider all ten classes as genuine Signs. I don't think this suggests an ambiguity in the meaning of 'genuine' and 'degenerate' but rather, an ambiguity in your definition of the Sign. You, as I understand it, confine the meaning of 'Sign' to be a synonym for

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Elementary Relatives or Individual Relatives

Thread: JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/17890 GF:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/17894 A budget of readings for present and future reference: Survey of Relation Theory

RE: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Edwina, in my study of NDTR, I am using Peirce’s definition of “Sign” exactly as given in that work; I quoted it (again) in the post you are responding to. If you have a problem with it, you’ll have to take it up with Peirce, not with me. As for what you choose to place into your pigeonholes of

[PEIRCE-L] New York Pragmatist Forum: Spring Meeting Schedule, Call for Papers

THE NEW YORK PRAGMATIST FORUM Fordham University at Lincoln Center, 9th (Columbus) Avenue at 60th Street New York, USA 10023 For more information: jmgr...@fordham.edu Spring 2016 Meetings Announcement and Call for Papers Friday, January 29, 2016, 5:30-7:30 p.m. “New Work

Aw: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Elementary Relatives or Individual Relatives

Hi Jon, All, I dont want to interrupt the discussion about terms, but I have a question that is about the mathematical relation- but I think this consideration might be expanded to semantics and semiotics. In mathematics, I have read somewhere, a relation is a subset of a cartesian product. Now

Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Gary F- I'm aware that Peirce used the term 'sign' to refer to both the Representamen and the full triadic semiosic process. As you know, your confining the term to mean ONLY the Representamen, is a problem I have, not with Peirce, but with your outlines. I doubt that you and I will agree on

Re: [biosemiotics:8992] Re: [PEIRCE-L] signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Edwina, Gary R, John, lists, Edwina wrote: "Because Peirce's three categories don't correlate to the three worlds of Burgin and Popper (120315-a) [both of whom are excellent scholars] , doesn't mean that Peircean theory doesn't have anything to do with modern natural

Re: [biosemiotics:8992] Re: [PEIRCE-L] signs, correlates, and triadic relations

Typos: (1) Please replace "they thought that the same form of a mathematical equation, i.e., DPD, applies to both" with "they thought that it was impossible for the same form of a mathematical equation, i.e., DPD, to apply to both." (2) "Burgin [1]" with "Burgin [4]". Sorry for the confusion.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

My hero, Charles Peirce, rightly says that logic exists in the service of ethics, and ethics in the service of aesthetics. Following this triadic characterization of the foundations of knowledge, both language and music, in order to be good and beautiful, must be underpinned by well-formedness,

Re: Fw: RE: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

Michael, Jeff, List, Martin Lefebvre in "Peirce's Ethetics: A Taste for Signs in Art" (TRANSACTIONS OF THE CHARLES S. PEIRCE SOCIETY Vol. 43, No. 2, 2007) remarks: "For Peirce, the indebtedness of ethics and logic to esthetics lies at the very heart of the normativity and the rationality of both

[PEIRCE-L] RE: Entropy - anticipating the demise of the genocentric paradigm

Here is an interesting article that supports my conjecture for DNA entanglement (nonlocality) - for if every cell in a body houses an identical suite of DNA and chromosomes within its nucleus, then, following through on the thesis of this article, this would seem to suggest that DNA entanglement

RE: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

Always a good sign (sic!), Gary.M.-Original Message- From: g...@gnusystems.ca Sent: Dec 3, 2015 12:53 PM To: 'CSP' Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Elementary Relatives or Individual Relatives

Gary F., Jon, List, In a discussion of elementary relatives, you ask: "Perhaps correlates which are not relations are 'individual relatives'?" Here is a nice passage from "On an Improvement in Boole's Calculus of Logic: "There are in the logic of relatives three kinds of terms which

RE: [PEIRCE-L] in case you were wondering

Michael, you are probably unaware that my book Turning Signs also draws upon that same Heraclitus fragment, along with several others — http://gnusystems.ca/TS/gds.htm#bios — and my whole Chapter 2 (http://gnusystems.ca/TS/dlg.htm) is (you might say) an introduction to dialogism. Since I