Re: [PEIRCE-L] Fwd: Re: André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 5

> I suggest that offering supporting arguments for one's claims is more > likely to foster substantive discussion than merely making assertions and > allegations. > > Regards, > > Jon S. > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 1:41 AM Auke van Breemen < &g

[PEIRCE-L] Fwd: Re: André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 5

ssing phaneroscopy. Occupied with tha phaneron only, we still have to take the step of consciousness of objects-referred-to and consciousness of interaction. Auke Oorspronkelijk bericht -- Van: Auke van Breemen Aan: Jon Alan Schmidt , peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Datum: 21 juni 2021 om

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 6

Gary F. I think your next step is a little premature since there are still some unsettled questions regarding the slow read of the former sheet. Unless of course the method of tenacity is entertained, in that case you are justified to hurry up. Auke > Op 21 juni 2021 om 23:34 schreef g...@gnu

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 5

Gary, Why consciousness and not awareness or apperception? Those terms seem more adequate for the situation. Auke > Op 21 juni 2021 om 23:05 schreef Gary Richmond : > > Jon, Helmut, List, > > Thank you for correcting me, Jon. Yes, 1ns/2ns/3ns of consciousness. My > error. > >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 5

Jon, Instead of consciousness I would prefer awareness or, maybe still better, apperception (in the sense of leibniz) but for the remainder it is a good correction of Gary R's erronous response to Helmut and I think in line with the intention of Helmuts remark. Auke > Op 21 juni 2021 om 22:2

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 5

Jon, You wrote: In our current context, I fully agree that we are each making "good faith attempts to arrive at a terminology we can serviceably use in discussing Peirce's phaneroscopic practice." -- 1 Please specify current context. I get the impresion that context ought to be interpreted

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 5

Gary R, You wrote: > Nevertheless, your other points are well-taken. Even in speculative > grammar, Peirce replaces qualisign/sinsign/legisign (1903) with > tone/token/type (1906-1908) and experiments further with alternatives for > "tone." However, most of that is in unpublished manuscri

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4

anything I’ve said > is in conflict with anything Peirce said on the subject. > > > > Gary f. > > > > From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu > On Behalf Of Auke van Breemen > Sent: 19-Jun-21 09:18 > To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu >

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4

t; > > > Gary f. > > > > > > From: Auke van Breemen > Sent: 19-Jun-21 04:06 > To: g...@gnusystems.ca; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu > Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4 > > > > I think I never had you. So how

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4

the exact definition of "science", so ok, I guess, > phaneroscopy may be called a science. Setting closer borders of "regard" > helps to not miss something. > > Did I get everything ok? > > Best > > Helmut > > > > &

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4

John, Good points. You might be interested in Ramchandran and Hirstein's : Three laws of Qualia. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233684568_Three_laws_of_qualia_What_neurology_tells_us_about_the_biological_functions_of_consciousness Auke > Op 19 juni 2021 om 5:36 schreef "John F. Sow

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4

on with phaneroscopy, and give some examples, but that probably > wouldn’t answer your question either, so I’ll have to leave it at that. > > Gary f. > > > > From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu > On Behalf Of Auke van Breemen > Sent: 18-Jun-21 14:3

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4

y to develop a clear and > distinct idea of what the science is that Peirce called phenomenology or > phaneroscopy. > > I hope this helps … > > > > Gary f. > > > > > > From: peirce-l-requ...@list.iupui.edu > On Behalf Of

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 4

Gary, List I wrote: Or the veracity of a pheneroscopic excercize. -- You wrote: “Veracity” does not apply to it in the way it does to a proposition, because what is predominant in phaneroscopy is not Secondness but Firstness. -- In my non native estimate the word veracity applies to stories

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Readings about Semeiotic (was Readings about Phaneroscopy)

he feeling of being-in-control, but the dynamic object of science, namely, > > reality - has been lost - within all the unconnected immediate objects > > entrapped in each classification. > > > > Edwina > > > > On Wed 16/06/21 3:54 AM , "Auke

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Readings about Semeiotic (was Readings about Phaneroscopy)

Jon, You wrote: It is not just the method of analysis that is different for each science within Peirce's classification, but also the object of study. Phaneroscopy examines whatever is or could be present to the mind. Semeiotic studies only signs and semiosis. -- The dynamical object of sci

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Readings about Semeiotic (was Readings about Phaneroscopy)

Edwina, Jon, I disagree with both of you. With ET because yes that is possible. With Jon, no, it may be the same dynamical object. I always liked the distinction between formal and material object. Both phenomenology and semiotics have the same material object, but differ in formal object, or

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Readings about Semeiotic (was Readings about Phaneroscopy)

gt; > > > CSP: But a pure picture without a legend only > > says " something is like this." True he attaches what amounts to a legend. > > But that only makes his sentence analogous to a portrait we will say of > > Leopardi with

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Readings about Semeiotic (was Readings about Phaneroscopy)

Cathy, Gary must speak for himself, but I like the way in which you exemplfy the 'without legend or label' part of Peirce's determination of a painting as a hypericon. best, Auke van Breemen > Op 15 juni 2021 om 17:26 schreef Synechism Center : > > Gary R,

Re: Sowa and the Meaning of Equivalence Relation. Was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Consequence as Logical Primitive (was Resending)

Jerry, I think you did hit the weak spot: > But, I will save you the time and effort and suggest that the term > “equivalence” as you used it in the sentence: > > > > > > > > > > > > > JFS> In mathematics and logic, equivalence means freely > > > interch

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Inference as growth (was No subject

> Op 1 februari 2021 om 17:03 schreef Helmut Raulien : > > Auke, Jon, John, Edwina, All, > > I don´t see, that a transparent universe is the critical point: Jon A.S.´ > example is valid in a transparent universe too: > Helmut, The point is not if Jon's example is valid in a tra

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Inference as growth (was No subject

John, This part of the article Edwina send is relevant: It follows that logic, in Peirce’s illative, ecstatic sense, is better understood as an inductive rather than a deductive science, for the ampliative work of inductive inference better exemplifies, in a richer, fuller sense, the illative,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Existential Graphs in 1911

John, Let's take the sequence from the architecture of science: math. logic, phenomenology, semiotics, critical logic, ... , methaphysics. You assume that my remarks concern the interval logic ... methaphysics. That however was not the object of my remarks. My remarks concerned the interval ph

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Existential Graphs in 1911

John, During your repeated debates with Jon an experience I had as a freshman philosophy kept knocking at my doors of perception. It was the first meeting in which each of the students had to read a passage of Hegels logic. I was the first to read and started with the first alinea in which logi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Existential Graphs in 1911

John, I was thinking in terms of goals, i.e. what is the object you try to understand, not credentials. I can connect Jon's answer to my question with his line of reasoning and I did like that. Their might be differences in the goals and then it is always better to asses and value the differen

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Existential Graphs in 1911

From the list perspective: Jas wrote: I have said it before, I will say it again--we have different purposes, so we reach different conclusions. -- Since perspective is important, it might be a good idea to explicate the differences in purpose each of you entertain. best, Auke > Op 24 janu

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Philosophy of Existential Graphs (was Peirce's best and final version of EGs)

John, > Op 30 augustus 2020 om 20:55 schreef "John F. Sowa" : > > > Auke, I agree with you about the issues and priorities. > > AvB> Peirce is multi facetted. Each of us looks from a particular > angle... I am not interested in what might be the final version Peirce wrote > on the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's discovery of 2 June 1911 (was Philosophy of EGs

rrant summarily dismissing his earlier writings as "irrelevant and > obsolete." Such an approach would be no more legitimate than relying > entirely on earlier passages and ignoring the later ones. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Str

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's discovery of 2 June 1911 (was Philosophy of EGs

John, Jon Alen, list, I am not interested in what might be the final version Peirce wrote on the negation vs scroll isue. Even if John is right, the interesting point that remains is not the actual history of Peirce's thought, but the systematic problem it poses. It remainds me of Hempels confi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's methodology

John, Thanks for the Eisele pdf. I did like this ms fragment very much: Further, "It is not so much the history of science as it is the history of sound scientific thinking which I am considering" [Peirce MS 12801. -- It seems to come down to: never consider the textual production of a scienti

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Hyperbolic Cosmology (was The Pragmatic Trivium)

27; of Secondness to > > actually exist for more than a nanosecond, and, to reproduce as types > > [whether as chemical molecules or as cells]. > > > > Firstness continues within Thirdness; and therefore, there cannot > > be a final state of pure habits. &g

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: The Pragmatic Trivium

eradicable, and no room being left for the formation of > new habits, intellectual life would come to a speedy close" But - Peirce > reminds us that 'There always remains a certain amount of spontaneity in its > action, without which it would be dead" 6.148. > > Edwin

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: The Pragmatic Trivium

John, A good summary of Peirce's take on esthetics is to be found at: http://www.signosemio.com/peirce/esthetics.asp A nice feat of the description is that it contains some fine remarks on Peirce's conception of God. In the end, I think, that Peirce could regard any work on art less feeble onl

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

, to > an exertion, or to a Sign, which determination is the Interpretant. (CP > 4.536, 1906) > > > > > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran > Laymanhttp://www.LinkedIn.c

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

Jon Alen, Just to avoid misunderstanding. JAS: As I have made clear in multiple previous posts, I do not consider the emotional/energetic/logical interpretants to be the same as the immediate/dynamical/final interpretants. I never suggested that I do consider them the same and did not notice

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Sign Relations

failed > Op 16 juni 2020 om 3:42 schreef Jon Awbrey mailto:jawb...@att.net >: > > > Test • Please Ignore > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

interpretant (EP 2:409-410). Every sign has a > conditionally necessary (final) interpretant, and thus a possible (immediate) > interpretant, even if it never has an actual (dynamical) interpretant because > there does not happen to be an interpreter present to be determined

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

Jon Alen, Is this your opinion or Peirce's? > > Moreover, my point continues to be that it is not necessary for something > to be actually perceived in order to qualify as a sign. It is sufficient > that (1) it may determine a dynamical interpretant under various > circumstances by virtu

Re: Re: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

Jon Alen, > That is an opinion, and even if valid, it does not change the fact that > Peirce invented and defined "the commens." I find it misleading to use his > peculiar term to mean something else. > > Isn't our duscussion about the meaning of a particular term, i.e. commens? An

Re: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

Jon Alen, Robert, Edwina, John, List, > RM: We need the commens here to "contain" all these conventions and > therefore it cannot depend on the only minds that communicate; it is out of > minds. We discover it when we are born and then internalize it throughout our > lives. > JAS: Again, th

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The plethora of Interpretants

John, Thanks for this info. I came to this conclusion by analyzing the 8th signtype (rhematic, symbolic, legisign) from the point of view of KiF. ()= involvement. The outer brackets signify that the process is not yet finished. It just are fragments of what is involved in the proces: sheet, sig

Re: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Different Semeiotic Analyses (was tree-structure)

ke this message to be a heartfelt apology as I never meant to > offend, just to play a little game that, sadly, went bad. > > Best, > > Gary > > > > > "Time is not a renewable resource." gnox > > > > Gary Richmond

Fwd: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Different Semeiotic Analyses (was tree-structure)

ise). :-) Best, Gary * "Time is not a renewable resource." gnox Gary Richmond Philosophy and Critical Thinking Communication Studies LaGuardia College of the City University of New York On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 4:29 AM Auke van Breemen < a.bree...@upcmail.nl mailto:a.br

Re: [PEIRCE-L] qualisigns

onal Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran > Laymanhttp://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > -http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 8:47 AM Auke van Breemen < a.bree...@chello.nl > mailto:a.bree...@chello.nl > wrote: > > > &

Re: [PEIRCE-L] qualisigns

Jon Alan, List, I think that by now our discussion about interpretants has been carried trough to a sufficient degree. In the sense that the respective positions have been clarified as far as possible and no further gain is to be expected. Yust one note about doubt supposed to be a habit. The m

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: tree-structure

Jon Alen, > while I indeed consider signs to be iconic/indexical/symbolic rather than > pure icons/indices/symbols, > re: I think we need to consider them from both angles. If we deal with interpretation processes we need the pure ones. The are needed to cover the apprehension of the si

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Fwd: an observation

at all is nothing more > or less than an attempt to block the road of inquiry. > > Gary f. > > } Owing to general causes, logic always must be far behind the practice > of leading minds. [Peirce, BD ’Method’] { > > http://gnusystems.ca/wp/ http://gnus

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Fwd: an observation

Gary, List, Well, this is nice meat for a semioticean. How is such a misunderstanding possible? For me the sliver pertains to John and the girder to JAS. It is JAS who on the one hand demands literal quotes (which belongs to text exegesis) but on the other avoids the meat (i.e. doing semioti

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The final interpretant

t reach agreement on the goal, and thus also not about the means in reaching it. This does not exclude us to have profitted from it, looked at from the goal each of us entertains. Best, Auke van Breemen Regards, Jon S. On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 2:00 AM < a.bree...@chello.nl mailto:a.bree

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The final interpretant

final interpretant > is a habit of feeling (emotional), action (energetic), or thought (logical). > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran > Laymanhttp://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > -http:

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The final interpretant

#x27;the determination of a field of > > consciousness' (The immediate interpretant/rheme got its index and became > > propositional for this interpreter. But still needed the representative > > content to enter the argument, being put under the general rule of > > infer

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories at work within the signs

Jon Alan, Since it proves a recurrent theme, I suggest we ought to try to find out what exactly is the meaning you attribute to the concept of God. You wrote: God as the real and independent object that determines the entire universe as a sign. -- And earlier you cited: As for scale, he s

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories at work within the signs

Jon Alan, I decided to insert our technical semiotic discussion in your exchange with Edwina. I noticed by the way that in 1. I at the end write normal where representative is ment. You asked: Just to be clear, are you suggesting a direct correspondence between the alpha/beta/gamma EGs and th

Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Brief report on the pandemic from a Peircean triadic perspective by Fernando Zalamea

e the govt, > first reacts to the impact of 2ns, and the Immediate Interpretant is in a > mode of 1ns; the next is 2ns - and then, using its knowledge base within the > Representamen, the Final Interpretant in a mode of 3ns. But these are not > linear; t

Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Brief report on the pandemic from a Peircean triadic perspective by Fernando Zalamea

in a mode of Firstness, which sets up a mimetic population] ; or 3-2, > > > [Thirdness operating in a mode of Secondness] which sets up a networked > > > interactive population [ie, individuals interacting]; or 3-3 [Thirdness > > > operating in a mode of Thirdness]

RE: [PEIRCE-L] The pragmatics of Peirce .. and its importance

“they can usually accept lower-level facts without creating any conflict”. Hope this is more clearly stated. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Gary Richmond Verzonden: maandag 1 april 2019 21:11 Aan: Peirce-L Onderwerp: Re: [PEIRCE-L] The pragmatics of Peirce .. and its importance

RE: [PEIRCE-L] The pragmatics of Peirce .. and its importance

is something Peirce strongly suggested and was, indeed, his practice), in my view both are essential. Best, Gary Gary Richmond Philosophy and Critical Thinking Communication Studies LaGuardia College of the City University of New York On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 11:43 AM

RE: [PEIRCE-L] The pragmatics of Peirce .. and its importance

hinking Communication Studies LaGuardia College of the City University of New York On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 11:43 AM Auke van Breemen mailto:a.bree...@chello.nl> > wrote: Dan, Edwina, List, I agree with Dan and Edwina with an however in favor of work on the semiotic engine and

RE: RE: [PEIRCE-L] The pragmatics of Peirce .. and its importance

nd comparing ones tools. Best, Auke Edwina On Sat 30/03/19 11:43 AM , "Auke van Breemen" a.bree...@chello.nl <mailto:a.bree...@chello.nl> sent: Dan, Edwina, List, I agree with Dan and Edwina with an however in favor of work on the semiotic engine and its mak

RE: [PEIRCE-L] The pragmatics of Peirce .. and its importance

Dan, Edwina, List, I agree with Dan and Edwina with an however in favor of work on the semiotic engine and its make up in the technical terms that shy off the general public. Since I started analyzing design processes of artist in the late 80’íes I tried to combine an empirical bend with

RE: Re: [PEIRCE-L] The danger of destroying Peirce's semeiotic (was Ambiguities...

Jon, List, Gary already did a great job in furnishing arguments in favor of keeping in mind, that talk about signs of course can be done shorthand, but that it is wise to keep in mind the other relata, if the focus is on one of them. Jon, I do not know where your idea comes form, i.e. th

RE: [PEIRCE-L] The danger of destroying Peirce's semeiotic (was Ambiguities...

John, List, Regarding: JAS > Drawing attention to something actual is denoting that Object, which > is the function of an Index (EP 2:306-307; 1904); and a Rheme > obviously can be an Index, so it is false that a Rheme "can refer only > to possible objects." No. A rheme is never an index. I

RE: [PEIRCE-L] The Bedrock Beneath Pragmaticism

date for a normative import would be esthetics, but then we already are contemplating the sign in relation to a possible interpreter, hence an interpretant thought. I think it is this Gary F. is thinking about. Best, Auke van Breemen Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansa

RE: RE: Aw: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Imitation as pragmatism and solution to entropy problem

: Edwina Taborsky Verzonden: zondag 24 februari 2019 14:53 Aan: tabor...@primus.ca; 'Helmut Raulien' ; Stephen Jarosek CC: 'Auke van Breemen' ; 'Peirce-L' Onderwerp: Re: RE: Aw: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Imitation as pragmatism and solution to entropy problem That

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Imitation as pragmatism and solution to entropy problem

lack of an ability for compassion. With both I disagree. First task is to get an interest for what you want to make clear. And, because of the variation, the decision taker must have attention for the traits of the specific subject (s)he is judging. I think both are interrelated. Best, Auke v

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Imitation as pragmatism and solution to entropy problem

Is there a difference in the way you try to establish contact and teach that depends on the hypothesis you work with? Case 1: it is a problem with the imagination or mimicking of action Case 2: it is a problem with the directing of attention Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Jerry

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Imitation as pragmatism and solution to entropy problem

adaptability to circumstances is seriously hindered in this way. And indeed, as you state, it appears as an inability to mimic social wished behavior. Until, that is, one succeeds in getting attention for the social problems, in that case a social scientist may be the result. Best, Auke van Breemen

RE: RE: Re: [PEIRCE-L] was EGs and Phaneroscopy

go together with a plan for action that delivers a solution. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Edwina Taborsky Verzonden: zondag 17 februari 2019 17:06 Aan: tabor...@primus.ca; 'Peirce-L' ; 'Gary Richmond' ; Auke van Breemen Onderwerp: Re: RE: Re: [PEIRCE-L] was

RE: Re: [PEIRCE-L] was EGs and Phaneroscopy

Edwina, list, E wrote: I agree and am puzzled by the strong effort of some to develop an isolate framework of the work of Peirce - a particular framework based around a purely intellectual outline of interactions and strict terminological definitions which in my opinion both utterly miss th

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: EGs and Phaneroscopy

the three-trichotomy. But choose to write: * It further puzzles me that so many researchers still focus on the three-trichotomy. The bold word in the second sentence is not stating something factual, but adds a negative judgement. Best, Auke van Breemen Although he

RE: [PEIRCE-L] was EGs and Phaneroscopy

basic dependency structure for the process of semiosis. The 1.1 qualisign – 3.3 argument structure of the sign aspects. Hope to have clarified my mail a little. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Gary Richmond Verzonden: vrijdag 15 februari 2019 20:20 Aan: Peirce-L Onderwerp: Re:

RE: [PEIRCE-L] was EGs and Phaneroscopy

last trichotomy. 10. Assurance of interpretants by signs. a. assurance by instinct b. assurance by experience c. experience by habit. It is a measure for the adequacy of the response. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Gary Richmond Verzonden: woensdag 13 februari 2019 21:23

RE: [PEIRCE-L] A seme is a predicate or a quasi-predicate

rds, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt <http://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt <http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 7

RE: [PEIRCE-L] A seme is a predicate or a quasi-predicate

Jerry, In my opinion: Yours is a pretty good indication of what I would regard as the hard core of the research program, i.e. the three categories or a triadic approach. Best, Auke Van: Jerry Rhee Verzonden: zondag 3 februari 2019 22:27 Aan: Auke van Breemen CC: John F Sowa

RE: [PEIRCE-L] A seme is a predicate or a quasi-predicate

he same. For instance when we deal with the spoken and written forms. Familiarity may overcome differences in form by an established law; because two different forms raise the same symbol habitually. It acts as a same sign. Best, Auke van Breemen - PEIRCE-L su

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Signs, Types, Tokens, Instances

terms man and homme and the kind of analysis Peirce performs when, for instance he discusses the Question: “What is the weather today?”, as posed to his wife on an early morning. Regards, Jon S. On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 10:02 AM Auke van Breemen mailto:a.bree...@chello.nl> > w

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Signs, Types, Tokens, Instances

utterances and communication processes. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Jon Alan Schmidt Verzonden: zaterdag 26 januari 2019 16:50 Aan: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Onderwerp: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Signs, Types, Tokens, Instances Auke, List: What I am suggesting can be summarized as follows

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Signs, Types, Tokens, Instances

after that consider it in its signi_cance; and the like must happen if the sign addresses itself to any quasi-mind. It must begin by forming a determination of that quasi-mind, and nothing will be lost by regarding that determination as the sign.14 EP 2 p.391 1906 Best, Auke van Breemen

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Signs, Types, Tokens, Instances

not the rule. I agree that with regard to what the terms connote, respectively English, French language with man and homme and written, spoken form with ‘there’ they are definitely regarded as of different type. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Jon Alan Schmidt Verzonden: donderdag 24

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Signs, Types, Tokens, Instances

something(s) is the same sign (what for the qualisign/token aspects?) is a complicated question. So I would substitute on aspect level. Best, Auke van breemen Van: Jon Alan Schmidt Verzonden: donderdag 24 januari 2019 16:51 Aan: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Onderwerp: Re: [PEIRCE-L

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Signs, Types, Tokens, Instances

letter types handwritten, printed or on the screen, regarded as the same, already pull in the direction of a tolerant way in dealing with similarity. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Jon Alan Schmidt Verzonden: donderdag 24 januari 2019 15:15 Aan: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Onderwerp

RE: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories and Modes of Being (was How should semeiotic be classified?

John, I see that you still put semiotics beneath phenomenology. My question: if speculative grammar, with alternative name semiotics is not the first of the normative logic branch anymore, what occupies this spot instead? You seem to argue that because semiotic is not normative it cannot be par

RE: [PEIRCE-L] How should semeiotic be classified among the sciences?

John, Gary R, List, There are two possible ways to proceed the discussion. The first is trying to prove ones position right, the second is trying to understand why the question could appear. Gary's contribution about utens and docens, that I quote, belongs for me to the second way, which I like

RE: [PEIRCE-L] How should semeiotic be classified among the sciences?

John, Frances, I am puzzled. Speculative rhetoric the first branch of non-mathematical logic is an alias for semiotics. There is no reason at all to look elsewhere in the classification of the science. Auke -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: John F Sowa Verzonden: maandag 10 september 20

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Possibility and actuality: What does a variable refer to?

John, Auke > Cees Schuyt, a Dutch Peirce scholar, suggested to distinguish being, > existence and reality. John Suppose somebody (Euclid for example) said "If there exists a line AB, then there exists an equilateral triangle ABC with AB as one side." Where would the line AB and the triangle ABC

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Possibility and actuality: What does a variable refer to?

John, You asked: Does anyone have any preferences for or against the pair Transcendental/Physical instead of Mathematical/Physical? -- Against, because it muddles the original question i.e. the relation of math with the other sciences (whether theoretical like phenomenology, semiotic and meth

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Schematic Representation of the Triad ?

Jon, Do you mean with the sign itself the replica signsign? The sign in actu addresses an object and raises an interpretant sign. So I would say that function is nicely expressed by the sign of teridentity: >- Object and sign co-determining the interpretant sign. The triad I find use

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: A Sign Is Not a Real Thing

, a Dicent Indexical Legisgn, a Dicent Symbolic Legisign, a Rhematic Symbolic Legisign. But wouldn't both the written and spoken forms of this word, even though they materially differ, be interpreted in a similar way? Edwina On Thu 09/08/18 6:14 AM , "Auke van Breemen" a.bre

RE: [PEIRCE-L] A Sign Is Not a Real Thing

recognition?) the second stemming from habits of interpretation, symbols (imputed). Auke van Breemen Van: Edwina Taborsky Verzonden: donderdag 9 augustus 2018 3:40 Aan: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Onderwerp: [PEIRCE-L] A Sign Is Not a Real Thing Gary R, JAS, list 1] I question the claim

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Logical Depth and Signification

Jerry, list, Hence semiotics as the first branch of normative logic. Critic the second and methodeutic the third. You may try to force your undifferentiated view of logic on the works of Peirce but will find out in the long run that is doesn’t work. Best, Auke Van: Jerry LR Chandl

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Logical Depth and Signification

John, (Jerry), Thanks, I couldn't explain my remark better to Jerry. Auke -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: John F Sowa Verzonden: zaterdag 28 juli 2018 4:17 Aan: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Onderwerp: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Logical Depth and Signification Helmut, Auke, and Jerry, HR > what does "n

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Logical Depth and Signification

Jerry, Don't confuse mathematical logic with normative logic. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Jerry LR Chandler Verzonden: donderdag 26 juli 2018 23:55 Aan: Peirce List CC: Jon Alan Schmidt Onderwerp: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Logical Depth and Signification List: On Jul 26, 201

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Biosemiosis (was Lowell Lecture 3.12

Gary, I recall Hulswit had an interest in both. I do think it has helped him in his work on (teleological) causation, especially with regard to getting a clear sight on the notion of process. Auke Van: Gary Richmond [mailto:gary.richm...@gmail.com] Verzonden: zaterdag 20 januari 201

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Modal logic

John, You wrote: Maybe. But these are issues for which we could benefit from more easily accessible resources -- such as well organized and cross referenced transcriptions of all of Peirce's MSS. It would also be useful to have all of the MSS cross linked to everything that any and all Peirce

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Modal logic (was Nativity scenes

Jerry, list, A good question. Looking in http://jfsowa.com/pubs/worlds.pdf I find: Existents. This universe includes "Objects whose Being consists in their Brute reactions, and of, second, the Facts (reactions, events, qualities, etc.) concerning

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Modal logic (was Nativity scenes

december 2017 16:05 Aan: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Onderwerp: [PEIRCE-L] Modal logic (was Nativity scenes On 12/31/2017 7:14 AM, Auke van Breemen wrote: > I am unsure about the place of modality, but maybe it just boils down > to a firstness and secondness view on the issue. Historical note: Ari

RE: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nativity scenes

why semiotics is a normative science. Best wishes, Auke van Breemen Van: Gary Richmond [mailto:gary.richm...@gmail.com] Verzonden: zondag 31 december 2017 4:02 Aan: Peirce-L Onderwerp: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nativity scenes Peter, Jeff, list, Peter, I too

RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nativity scenes

, if it is symbolic (convention, as you wrote) mustn´t it be a legisign? I agree that it might be just a dicent, and to make an argument of it would require additional information. Best, Helmut 30. Dezember 2017 um 20:26 Uhr Von: "Auke van Breemen" mailto:a.bree...@chello.nl>

RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nativity scenes

interpretation as the conversation shows. I can’t judge it in its original location and context, where it might appear, but this is just unwarranted speculation, as a dicent and maybe as such as a part of an argument. Best, Auke van Breemen Van: Helmut Raulien [mailto:h.raul

RE: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nativity scenes

m of continuing this thread any further, but a couple of listers have requested an image of the Trondheim Nativity scene, so here it is, attached. Best, Peter _ From: Ben Novak mailto:trevriz...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2017 5:13:43 PM To: Jerry Rhee Cc: Auke

  1   2   >