On 3/9/2019 3:24 PM, Gary Richmond wrote:
After all, Peirce sometimes suggests that the quasi-equivalent to
pragmatism in 'ordinary' speech and thinking is critical-common
sense. And, indeed, pragmaticism itself would seem to depend on it.
I agree. Homo saps and their ancestors have existed
I am unusual in that I am scientifically impaired and mathematically
incapable and even logically perhaps the same. I have never considered it
until I encountered Peirce and saw his difficulties stemming from his
quirks and personality. I think I have observed that his people came to
Watertown whe
Gary R., List:
Are you sure that you are in full agreement with this statement?
JAS: There are "facts of phenomenology," but as soon as we begin analyzing
these "familiar phenomena"--especially with respect to their "conformity
... to ends which are not immanent within" them--we are engaging in
Edwina, Stephen, List,
Edwina wrote: I'm not sure if [Stephen's] comment pertained to 'scientific
intelligence' but instead, refers to the difference between, let's say, a
'scientific intelligence' and 'intelligence' just on its own. The former
operates within pragmaticism while the latter include
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}Gary R - I can't, of course, speak for Stephen, but I'm not sure if
his comment pertained to 'scientific intelligence' but instead,
refers to the difference between, let's say, a 'scientific
intelligence' and 'intelligence
Stephen, list,
You wrote: There is an inherent flaw or contradiction in Peirce's
distinction between the words scientific and intelligence. To be scientific
requires a mentality which is quite clear to those who possess it but not
to those who do not.
In the context of discussing "Logic, in its g
Jon, Gary f, list,
I have nothing at present to add to what Jon has written and only wish to
note that I am in full agreement with him.
Best,
Gary R
*Gary Richmond*
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*Communication Studies*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
On Sat, Mar
Gary F., List:
GF: A *normative *science for Peirce (and as far as I know, for anyone who
uses the word regularly) is one whose essence is to *make dualistic
judgments* distinguishing good from bad, true from false, right from wrong,
etc.
Peirce quite explicitly *did not* define "normative scie
There is an inherent flaw or contradiction in Peirce's distinction between
the words scientific and intelligence. To be scientific requires a
mentality which is quite clear to those who possess it but not to those who
do not. Intelligence must cover a wide but accurate realm consisting of
most sent
Sorry about the typo I missed (“meniotics”, fixed below).
I should also add that normative logic (not formal logic) must be deployed by
all sciences (including semeiotic) in the stage of their inquiry where they are
obliged to test the truth of the inferences they make against their
observation
Jon, Gary R, John, list,
JAS: … Semeiotic as a generalization of normative logic to encompass all kinds
of Signs, not just Symbols; i.e., Speculative Grammar. Again, it is normative
because it studies "what must be the characters of all signs used by a
'scientific' intelligence, that is to say
11 matches
Mail list logo
