On 2/2/2019 8:16 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
Peirce did not introduce the concept of the Continuous Predicate until
1908, so anything that he wrote about Propositions prior to that
reflects a different analysis--presumably the same one adopted in modern
predicate logic, which you continue to
Dear Gary, list,
To my open mind and eyes, all that appears to be metaphysical rubbish.
Perhaps not so obvious, then..
Best wishes,
Jerry R
On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 10:53 PM Gary Richmond
wrote:
> Jon, John, List,
>
> JAS: ... there is a late passage ... that spells out in considerable
Jon, list,
Jon wrote:
I am curious to learn exactly how you . . . would define panentheism in
this context, as contrasted with theism, and then attempt to revise the
major premise accordingly in order to obtain a compatible conclusion.
Peirce explicitly described the Object as "something
Jon, John, List,
JAS: ... there is a late passage ... that spells out in considerable
detail what Peirce ultimately considered to be the "proper" logical
analysis of a proposition.
JFS: No. Definitely not.
Again, the evidence says otherwise. Peirce plainly stated to Jourdain that
"the
John S., List:
With sincere respect, I believe that we are now at the point where we will
simply have to accept our disagreement and move on. Peirce did not
introduce the concept of the Continuous Predicate until 1908, so anything
that he wrote about Propositions prior to that reflects a
Gary R., List:
Thank you for your very kind words. I look forward to further feedback and
discussion.
I actually debated formatting the summary just as you proposed, but
ultimately decided to add the fourth bullet as tacit acknowledgement that
identifying God as the Object that determines the
Jon, Gary
I suggest that while signs point to the Light or whatever universal name we
use to refer to the Cause, Creator, Force, etc.that it is this source that
makes semiotics the realization that it is -- in other words the basis of
Peirce's statement that all thought is in signs. I see
Jon AS, list
I changed the subject line to emphasize the conclusion.
To see the evolution of Peirce's ideas, look at the chronological
developments. In 1903, Peirce defined the word 'seme' in a way
that is inconsistent with what he wrote in 1906:
An Index or Seme is a Representamen whose
Jon, list,
This is, in my opinion, a most impressive semeiotic argument (really, an
extended *argumentation* in Peirce's sense) for the Reality of God. This is
to say that it would seem to me to be an explication of Peirce's (and, I
assume, your) religious views as they relate to his sign theory,
List:
One of Peirce's last published articles was "A Neglected Argument for the
Reality of God," and he made his theism--idiosyncratic though it
was--unmistakably clear in its very first sentence.
CSP: The word "God," so capitalized (as we Americans say), is *the *definable
proper name,
List, FYI.
Associazione Pragma
11 matches
Mail list logo
