Gary F., List:
Thank you for this helpful clarification. We seem to agree that Peirce's
cosmology and contemporary Big Bang cosmology rest on different
metaphysical assumptions, which is what I have been trying to emphasize all
along. I also agree with you that Peirce's cosmology cannot be reduc
> On Aug 22, 2019, at 11:04 PM, John F Sowa wrote:
>
> On 8/21/2019 1:18 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>> I suggest that [Peirce] could have offered an argument against
>> [the Big Bang] -- in fact, against any theory that posits a finite
>> age and definite beginning of the universe...
>
> No.
Jeffrey- thanks for your comments and the article. It certainly
describes two different cosmological hypotheses - and - we don't know
which is valid!
Interesting - that Hawking proposed a cosmology where the universe
emerged 'out of nothing'. This seems similar to the outline of Peirce
i
Jon S, Gary F, John S, List,
Peirce engages in inquiries that fall under the headings "cosmological
metaphysics" and "cosmological physics." (see, for example, CP 6.213, As we
know, he is drawing on a number of resources including mathematics,
phenomenology and semiotics for the sake of direc
Jon,
All theories in physics, indeed all theories in “special sciences,” rest on
metaphysical assumptions; that’s what makes them special sciences. Peirce’s
cosmology is not a special science, certainly not a physical science. According
to Peirce’s metaphysics, based on logical principles (as h
Gary F., List:
As I have already stated, I do not see how Peirce's synechistic and
hyperbolic cosmology is compatible with the hypothesis of a singularity
(discontinuity) at the beginning of the universe, especially since he
affirmed more than once that time began "infinitely long ago" as whatever
Jon, John, List,
I don’t see how Peirce’s cosmology, which is essentially metaphysical (i.e.
based on logical principles), has any bearing on the Big Bang theory, which is
strictly a physical hypothesis testable only by means of physical observations.
I suppose Peirce as physicist would have ha
John, List:
JFS: An amazing event occurred around 13.8 billion years ago.
Again, that estimated time frame relies on the assumption that the laws of
nature have remained essentially unchanged for the entire duration--a
presupposition that Peirce rejected in favor of "thorough-going
evolutionism
