RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Secret Language of Plants

EDWINA: “And it IS an aspect of 'Mind'. As Peirce said - "Thought is not necessarily connected with a brain.” Ultimately, the question of what role a brain plays relates to thermodynamics. Plants don’t have brains because the choices that they make from their Umwelts are simple, and in “slow mo

Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Secret Language of Plants

Yes, I agree - it's the role of energy. In 1997, I set up an international conference titled SEE: Semiosis/Evolution/Energy. This was specifically devoted to the concept that semiosis deals with the 'rational' transformation of energy from one morphology into another. We had sp

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Lowell Lecture 2.14

List, Mary, Lowell 2.14 introduces the spot (which must not be confused with either the dot or the blot!), and in this connection is worth comparing with MS 439, the third of the Cambridge Lectures of 1898 (RLT 146-164, NEM4 331-46). In this lecture given five years before Lowell 2, Peirce bega

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Lowell Lecture 2.14

Gary f., I cannot understand your use of quotation marks. Why say: ... his "categories"??? Insted of... his categories??? Also, instead or warning against confusing SPOT, DOT and BLOT, it would have been most interesting to hear how they are related. This is all about relational logic, is it

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Secret Language of Plants

On 11/25/2017 8:21 AM, Stephen Jarosek wrote: Plants don’t have brains because the choices that they make from their Umwelts are simple, and in “slow motion”. Yes, but every cell from bacteria on up has memory and can signal neighboring cells via chemical excretions. When a cell is attacked, i

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Secret Language of Plants

BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }Oh dear, oh dear. I love the smell of newly cut grass. Does that mean - it must mean - yes, yes, that I am some kind of hidden sadist; that I love the 'smell of destruction'; that I am transported by the whiff of .

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Lowell Lecture 2.14

List: g...@gnusystems.ca kirjoitti 25.11.2017 21:52: > List, Mary, > Lowell 2.14 introduces the SPOT (which must not be confused with > either the DOT or the BLOT!), and in this connection is worth > comparing with MS 439, the third of the Cambridge Lectures of 1898 >

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Lowell Lecture 2.14

Kirsti, you asked why my post about 2.14 put “categories” in quotation marks. It’s because that is the term Peirce used for Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness in the Cambridge Lectures of 1898. In the Lowell Lectures (and the Syllabus) of 1903, he mostly used the term “elements” instead, as we’

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Lowell Lecture 2.13

List: > On Nov 23, 2017, at 12:42 AM, John F Sowa wrote: > > Jerry, > >>> If Peirce had intended any further meaning, he would have >>> mentioned it explicitly. >> Really? > > They're not conjectures. They're observations based on studying > Peirce's writings. If you claim otherwise, show th