Jon, list,
On the question of which of the three Universes may not “have a Creator
independent of it,” I’d like to offer an argument that it could be the Universe
of Firstness rather than Thirdness. However I won’t have time this week to
construct an argumentation as thoroughgoing as your ar
List,
Regarding the question, whether Peirce was a pantheist or not, I was thinking about the meaning of "immanent". If it means that something is contained (nonlocally in this case), like as an epiphenomenon or a trait of something, then something "immanent" implies not being the creator of this
Gary F., List:
GF: I think it would be less of a stretch to identify the *contents* of
those Universes as Firsts, Seconds and Thirds, i.e. as subjects or objects
in which Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness (respectively) inhere.
I have generally been reluctant to talk about Firsts/Seconds/Th
Helmut, List:
My understanding of "pantheism" is that it entails that God is "immanent in
nature," so Peirce's explicit denial of this in three different drafts of
"A Neglected Argument" is pretty decisive evidence against deeming him a
pantheist. It seems to me that Edwina's adjustment--stating
I think that one has to first define 'God'. If the term means 'pure mind' then,
this fits in with Peirce's analysis - for he considers that Mind is 'immanent
in nature'. Of course, one then has to define 'Mind' - and I disagree that it
is only Thirdness, but consider that it, as a powerful pr
Jon, Gary F, List,
Gary F wrote:
*[GF: ] *But I think you will agree that *possibility* is the logical
equivalent of Firstness, not Thirdness. Peirce at this stage in his
thinking often identified continuity with generality, and he wrote c.1905
that “The generality of the possible” is “the only t
Dear list:
Lest we not ignore all who investigate, Alasdair McIntyre situates the
neglected argument and makes some amusing philosophical moves in his
lecture, “On Being a Theistic Philosopher in a Secularized Culture”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0tm-5JXRXkM
First, he recognizes Peirce a
Dear Helmut
I think your problem is solved by Panentheism, which accept the divine to be
both transcendent and immanent. Thus the Tohu va Bohu or pure Zero is the
transcendent, which as the first step in creation produces Firstness as real
possibilities of forms of existence, combined with the
Dear Jon
I have discussed this with Edwina before. I think the correct label for Peirce
is a Hylozoism or Hylopathism inspired by Aristotle, which only indicates that
matter is alive and in combination with his synechism that matter is a living
field.
Peirce writes: Has Time, or has Space, any
Edwina, List:
ET: I think that one has to first define 'God'. If the term means 'pure
mind' then, this fits in with Peirce's analysis ...
The handful of quotes that I included in my post to start this thread give
us a pretty good idea of how Peirce defined God, at least with respect to
his cosm
Søren, List:
SB: I think your problem is solved by Panentheism, which accept the divine
to be both transcendent and immanent.
Again, I am now leaning against trying to apply any such label to Peirce.
Granted, one of the three drafts that I quoted from R 843 indicates that
God is not *merely *im
Søren, List:
It is interesting that you mentioned Edwina and quoted CP 6.24-25 at
length. As you may recall, she and I discussed that same passage
extensively a couple of months ago, in the thread on "Peirce's Objective
Idealism." Unfortunately, we were unable to reach agreement on whether he
re
Jon, list
You wrote:
Searching the List archives and the Internet in general has (so far) turned up
no rationale for instead taking them to represent the three types of inference.
By 'three types of inference' - I am guessing that you mean the three types of
argumentation. That's how I read th
Edwina, List:
As a matter of fact, I have read that particular article, since it came up
in the thread on "Peirce's Theory of Thinking." Chiasson's thesis is that
Peirce was really writing about "the *attitude* and *method* from which all
decisions of importance to the conduct of a life should be
Dear list:
Here’re some breadcrumbs for Firstness Secondness Thirdness:
Peirce's Neglected Argument, Bowman L. Clarke
The breadcrumbs for First Second Third as categories, which relate to the
Universes are in A Guess at the Riddle.
But really, your approach is flawed.
You have to learn to
15 matches
Mail list logo
