Edwina, Jon, List,
The following observation is a good starting point for analyzing the
development iof Peirce's thought and writing from 1903 to 1908 and later:
ET: I note that JAS seems to refer to his examination of the hexadic semiosic
process as within the linguistic realm. If this outlin
I will try to answer in pints:
> On Apr 4, 2024, at 8:18 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>
> Edwina, List:
>
> In light of our longstanding and all-too-often contentious disagreements
> about Peirce's speculative grammar, I generally prefer to refrain from direct
> engagement these days, but I h
John, List:
I have likewise already read (and carefully studied) about a dozen articles
by Tony Jappy, as well as his 2017 book, *Peirce's Twenty-Eight Sign
Classes and the Philosophy of Representation*. Why assume otherwise?
I still disagree with him on destinate=final and explicit=immediate (as
Edwina, List:
In light of our longstanding and all-too-often contentious disagreements
about Peirce's speculative grammar, I generally prefer to refrain from
direct engagement these days, but I have decided to make an exception in
this case. Hopefully, I will not regret it.
ET: I am aware that JA
Jon,
I have read your comments, and I have read several articles by Tony Jappy that
explain these issues in far greater depth and generality. I strongly urge you
to study his writings.
John
From: "Jon Alan Schmidt"
Sent: 4/4/24 12:39 PM
To: Peirce-L
List
I am aware that JAS’s use of ‘determines’ is not synonymous with ‘causes’ or
‘precedes’ - but is ‘logically constrains’. However, something that ‘logically
constrains’ DOES, functionally operate as causal and precedent to other forces-
otherwise - how would it function as that constraint?.
List:
While I am at it, I might as well elaborate on my third reason for
believing that the proper order of the interpretant trichotomies for sign
classification is final, then dynamical, then immediate--namely, the ten
sign classes that result from applying the rule of determination are much
more
List
I think it’s almost useless to discuss these issues, since I’m aware that JAS
has his set of beliefs about the Peircean framework - and I [ and others] -
have our own beliefs - which may or may not, align with his.
But just a few points:
1] JAS quote Peirce: “ No matter what his opinion a
