ranches--Speculative Grammar, Critic, and Methodeutic. Are you really
going to quibble over the absence of the *word *"Semeiotic," when that is
unquestionably what he had in mind?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Luthe
ranch of Mathematics, and thus
has no dependencies; it is a *logica utens* that only draws *necessary
*conclusions
from *hypothetical *states of things. Semeiotic is the Normative Science
of logic, which depends on Mathematics, Phenomenology, Esthetics, and
Ethics; it is a *logica docens* that
his, then I continue to have a hard time
seeing how Phenomenology could be expanded to include branches *other than*
Phaneroscopy, as you and Andre De Tienne have proposed.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.Link
tive Science,
not Phaneroscopy. That is why *all *Semeiotic, *including *Speculative
Grammar, is a branch of the former, not the latter.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/Jon
e the difference between a Rheme and a
Seme. "_ is a car" or even "_ belongs to the class of car" is a
Rheme, an *incomplete *Proposition because a subject is missing; but "car"
by itself, without the copula or continuous predicate, is a Seme. I will
ask a
nd B may be erased, or accompanied by anything
> inserted. I am completely confused. Is there a rule that says:
> "((A((B)))=(B(A))", or is reversing the cut direction possible at all with
> EGs, or did I get the whole thing completely wrong? And, if possibility may
> be
(or a
predicate). After all, Peirce's ethics of terminology constrained him to
introduce "Seme" *only *because he needed a *new *name that was "much
widened" relative to "Term."
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher,
not formal/mathematical logic. It is an outcome of studying
reasoning itself (*logica docens*), not simply drawing necessary
conclusions.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanS
d not both, and that some propositions may be
recognized to be true" (CP 2.204-205; 1901-2). It is required for
Metaphysics, since it "endeavors to comprehend the Reality of Phenomena"
(CP 5.121, EP 2:197; 1903), as well as all of the Special Sciences.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Ol
ning its cause." It culminates in "the
consideration of homogeneities and connections between two different
Universes, or all three," where ultimately "we find that the three
Universes conspire." He also referred once to "the Universe" (singular).
Hence I
that throws everything possible into the
*subject*--but the results remain recognizable as EGs, rather than calling
for a different name and interpretation. Consequently, I am now inclined
to stick with this alternative going forward, instead of advocating
something new--which would probably be in va
distinction may not need to be drawn too sharply anyway.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 12:01 PM Gary Richmond
wrote:
> Gary F
gonal
hatching with ragged (not smooth) edges, which is how Peirce drew it R 670.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:37 AM wrote:
> Lis
Jon S.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 11:54 AM Jon Alan Schmidt
wrote:
> Gary F., List:
>
> I agree that Peirce ultimately gave up on iconizing modality in
> two-dimensional Gamma EGs, instead settling for the R 514 tutorial that
> only covers Alpha and Beta. A three-dimensional imple
hat you have to say about Cuts, especially given
your claim that it "spells trouble for the whole system of EGs." Are you
perhaps referring to Peirce's remarks in R 300 about the inadequacy of
representing "the concept of *Sequence*" as "a composite of two Negations&q
ify the relevance of
my previous one.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:21 AM wrote:
> Jon, list,
>
> I will quote below
ies in its bringing qualities and things together. (CP
1.515; c. 1896, bold added)
Paraphrasing Peirce elsewhere, I confess that my own conception of this
parallel formulation of the third Cenoscopic Science is not yet quite free
from mist (cf. CP 4.536; 1906), so I am open to other suggestions.
Reg
to "if B then A". What rings a bell to me, is, that usually, as
> I was thinking, an "if-then" affair is causality, and causality usually
> goes along with time. But in this case, the causality between A and B, by
> this obvious-if-you-know-it equivalency, is reversed, a
x27;s way
up from there.
Here is a direct link to R 1041--
https://rs.cms.hu-berlin.de/peircearchive/pages/search.php?search=%21collection1083
.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitte
future), I term the Sign a *Concretive*; any one
barometer is an example, and so is a written narrative of any series of
events. For a Sign whose Dynamoid Object is a Necessitant, I have at
present no better designation than a *Collective *... (EP 2:480; 1908)
CSP: In respect to the Nature of th
(in the example)
> there may be a society without xenophobia, though crystals do exist
>
> Best,
> Helmut
> 01. März 2019 um 15:16 Uhr
> "Jon Alan Schmidt"
> Helmut, List:
>
> As Peirce often noted, and as the corresponding Existential Graph visually
> i
additional volumes of
the Writings; those have been stuck at 1892 for almost ten years now.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 8:50 PM John F
;
> Or may C be true, because a falsity is a false connection of truths,
> without which it could not exist?
>
> Best, Helmut
> 28. Februar 2019 um 17:58 Uhr
> "Jon Alan Schmidt"
>
> Helmut:
>
> By "B is a fault," do you mean "B is false"
is no paradox--it is false that B derives from A; i.e., C is false.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:06 AM Helmut Raulien wrote
sometimes exclusively, as with "Cain
killed Abel." Again, I believe that there is further fruit to be harvested
from the notion that "the proper way in logic is to take as the subject
whatever there is of which sufficient knowledge cannot be conveyed in the
proposition itself, but c
aragement.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:21 AM John F Sowa wrote:
> On 2/26/2019 9:49 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
> &
nd sometimes that process produces surprises, forcing us to
reconsider views that we previously considered to be settled.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On M
te *predicates, such as "killing"--must *already *be known to
the interpreting Quasi-mind from Collateral Experience, while the latter is
the *only *information that the Proposition *itself *conveys.
With all of that in mind, perhaps Propositional Graphs (PGs) would be a
better name than Modif
ny case, such condescension is rather unbecoming. I have expressed my
respect for you on multiple occasions during our recent exchanges, despite
our sharp disagreements.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/i
t" what I am proposing--which, for the record, I am not dogmatically
seeking to impose on anyone else.
CSP: *Do not block the way of inquiry* ... The last philosophical obstacle
to the advance of knowledge which I intend to mention is the holding that
this or that law or truth has found its last
uch a
"theorem" can presumably be derived deductively? As someone not especially
adept at Phaneroscopy myself, I wonder if a careful and diligent practice
of it could provide an answer, or at least some hints in the right
direction.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professi
are precisely *habits *of feeling, action, and thought.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 9:34 AM Edwina Taborsky wrote:
> List
&g
c, and Metaphysics. We *perceive *relations with different
*valencies*, which correspond to the three *Categories*; we
*experience *Objects
with different *Modalities of Being*, which correspond to the three
*Universes*. What do you think?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Profes
Gary R., Auke, List:
I apologize, "abandoned" was indeed too strong a word; and if researchers
today continue to find Peirce's 1903 taxonomy of Signs to be useful for
their purposes, then far be it from me to block the way of inquiry.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, U
roper way in logic" (NEM 3:885; 1908)
by carrying the analysis of each Proposition "to its ultimate limits" (SS
72; 1908). Attached are a few examples for illustration and comparison.
Please let me know what you think.
Thanks,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional E
*some *aspects
of the Phaneron. However, I suspect that the *compulsive *aspect of
Experience as Peirce defined that term ultimately differentiates it from
what is merely *presented *to the mind--that which is true or false vs.
that which merely *seems*--and might account for the corresponding
di
lling to something that is not Caesar."
- Enclose everything except "Brutus" to represent "Brutus exists, and
Brutus does not kill Caesar."
- Enclose everything except "is in the relation of/to" to represent "a
dyadic relation exists, and Brutus
ot;most connections [of signs]
resulting from successive pairings, a sign frequently interprets a second
in so far as this is 'married' to a third" (R 1476:36; c. 1904).
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.Lin
as "the proper way in logic." He
apparently never discussed how to interpret EGs in accordance with that
analysis, which is why I am taking a stab at doing so myself.
JFS: It's impossible to have a logic without *both* subjects and
predicates. And predicates that refer to content a
e. I have a copy of that
book right now, thanks to interlibrary loan.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:59 AM wrote:
> Jon (and
iverse, independently of
whether you, I, or any collection of men or other cognoscitive beings
should opine that it did or that it did not, then that assertion would be
false. (CP 4.354; c. 1903)
CSP: Putting the admissions together, you will perceive that the
pragmaticist grants that a prope
t is composed of its (universally valid) qualities, "is
> identical to", that its identity is defined by the universe´s power, and
> "belongs to the class of" natural (not artificial) classification... Maybe
> in this respect, "power" I should replace with &q
if both were somehow "removed" would be an attribute of the
individual *Instance *instead, including Tones as "indefinite significant
character[s]" (CP 4.537; 1906) capable of modifying the Dynamic
Interpretant--e.g., font changes for emphasis, punctuation marks, voice
inflectio
ately deviated from these a bit, settling instead on
reference to a ground, reference to a correlate, and reference to an
interpretant as the bases for the Categories of quality, relation (later
reaction), and representation (later mediation), respectively.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, K
t;is in the relation of _ to,"
etc. The function of the proposition is then taken to be relating two or
more subjects by means of that one predicate.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchm
aracter
of," "is identical to," and "belongs to the class of," respectively.
With this approach, the only situation in which a Continuous Predicate must
remain concealed within a Spot is when the first Subject is a quality;
e.g., round---red translates to "something tha
ble. (R L 107; 1904)
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 4:35 PM Gary Richmond
wrote:
> Jeff, Gary f, Jon,
>
> Jeff wrote:
&g
ple Pegs on a
predicate Spot, there would simply need to be an arbitrary convention
specified and maintained for which branch corresponds to each blank; e.g.,
the giver, giving, the gift, and the recipient for "_ is in the triadic
relation of _ of _ to _,"
Regards,
Jon Alan Sc
than vernacular (cf. CP 6.452, EP 2:434; 1908).
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 8:56 AM Helmut Raulien wrote:
> Jon AS, list,
>
n thinking that led to
many of my recent posts. Of course, I always welcome your (and others')
feedback on those, as well.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
;things" may include events, processes, properties,
feelings...)
How can subjects be *disjoint *from predicates if they can denote
properties? How can predicates by themselves be "true of things" when only
a *complete *proposition is capable of being true or false?
Regards,
ision according to "the Manner of Appeal" (EP 2:490;
1908). An Instance of an Argument may be urged/Imperative, rather than
submitted/Indicative, because it always *involves *Instances
of Propositions that are *normally *urged/Imperative; and an Instance of an
Argument or a Proposition may be
ts by Peirce that I have cited before as guiding my ongoing
inquiries along these lines.
CSP: Logic [i.e., semeiotic] may be defined as the science of the laws of
the stable establishment of beliefs [i.e., habits]. (CP 3.429; 1896)
CSP: Metaphysics consists in the results of the absolute a
er of _." Each of these
Subjects is something *other than* the other two, although the different
Possibles are obviously instantiated in the same Existent. Wetness is
(often, but not always) an *Index *of freshness; paint is wet because it is
fresh, not fresh because it is wet.
Regards,
Jon Al
t;quasi-subject") over what he wrote more than
once ("Seme" and especially "continuous predicate"), later in his life, in
an analysis that he explicitly called "proper" and "ultimate"?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engine
orem" of the "science of semeiotics," which I hope to finish
soon.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 1:25 PM Matt Faunce
wrote:
*Instances.
Regards,
Jon S.
On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 4:43 PM Matt Faunce
wrote:
> First off, please ignore my second from last paragraph in my previous
> post, as I didn't flesh out my ideas very well.
>
> Further comments below.
>
> On Feb 3, 2019, at 5:13 PM, Jon Alan Sch
ould be acknowledged that one is deviating
from Peirce's own explicitly stated views; i.e., that he was *incorrect *to
affirm one or both of those propositions. Then the question becomes what
ramifications this has for his (and our) understanding of Signs and the
Universe.
Regards,
Jon Alan
er in your interpretation of
Peirce?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 8:24 AM Edwina Taborsky wrote:
> Gary R
>
> 1] Just
od a being merely
"immanent in Nature," but I mean that Being who has created every content
of the world of ideal possibilities, of the world of physical facts, and
the world of all minds, without any exception whatever. (R 843:25[4])
In all three cases, the emphasis on "not" is i
esty, I rarely
quote or otherwise respond to your posts simply because I often struggle to
see their relevance to the subject matter of the thread.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twi
purposes. That includes when we decompose a
Delome/Argument into Phemes/Propositions connected by a Logical Leading
Principle, and a Pheme/Proposition into Semes/Subjects connected by a
Continuous Predicate.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Phi
te" logical analysis of a Proposition, which throws *everything*
other than the Continuous Predicate into the Subject.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
O
th the verb
'is' in "Every mammal is an oxygen-breathing animal."
No, it would classify "mammal," "breathing," and "oxygen" as Subjects; and
"_ is in the relation of _ to _" as the Continuous Predicate.
The first blank is Designat
ed *those
views about God--perhaps even *required *them.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 4:56 PM Gary Richmond
wrote:
> Jon, list,
&
ch reality. It is the *entelechy*, or perfection of
being. (CP 6.341; c. 1909)
To summarize in the fashion of the famous Five Ways of Thomas Aquinas ...
- Every Sign is determined by an Object other than itself.
- The entire Universe is a Sign.
- Therefore, the entire Universe is determined by a
stead
throws everything into the predicate.
With all of that in mind, I wonder if "Subject" might be another
terminological alternative for "Seme," at least within the context of
formal logic. A "proper" Peircean analysis of a sentence in modern
predicate logic would
t Raulien wrote:
> Thank you, Jon!
>
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 30. Januar 2019 um 18:33 Uhr
> *Von:* "Jon Alan Schmidt"
> *An:* "Helmut Raulien"
> *Betreff:* Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Speculative Grammar: Logic as
> Semiotic
> Helmut, List:
>
>
CP 4.548) and replace the word 'seme' with
'name'.
I agree. Are you then proposing the trichotomy,
Name/Proposition/Argument? Or is "name" perhaps *too *vernacular to serve
as such a technical term in this context? I also have the same worry for
"name"
imited this to *human* semiosis; it
encompasses all that "happens according to Natural Law."
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
--
re ethical than implying that you have a deeper
understanding of what Peirce intended than he had.
When have I ever made or implied such an outrageous claim?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonA
ever, Dr. Bellucci's project is largely what I call
"exegetical," presenting and explicating what he takes to be Peirce's own
views; while mine is more "systematic," reworking some of the concepts and
terminology with the goal of tying it all together in a perspicuou
a substitute for an object of which it is, in some sense, a
representative or Sign" (CP 4.538; 1906). Rather than turtles, it *seems *to
me that the entire Universe is *Semes *all the way down.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosop
three divisions?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 8:37 PM John F Sowa wrote:
> Jon AS,
>
> > In modern predicate logic, is
John S., List:
In modern predicate logic, is the variable a predicate, a proposition, or
an argument (in Peirce's sense)? Clearly none of these, so either a fourth
division is required or the first one must be widened.
In standard notation for modern predicate logic, an upside-down A or E
repres
*all
Signs*. A pure Index denotes something without signifying anything, which
means that it neither is nor has a predicate.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
O
as pioneering, it still has a much broader scope than logic
proper--including illocutionary and perlocutionary aspects of individual
utterances, as we are now discussing in another thread. Although it would
certainly have to be explained carefully, I continue to wonder if using
"Seme" would hel
ommunication
> 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
>
>
&
emphasis,
punctuation marks, voice inflections, etc.--or if those only affect their
different *Dynamic *Interpretants.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sat
ul." This would
entail that the *same *Type can have *different *Immediate Interpretants,
in accordance with the different Tones that its individual Instances *possibly
could* embody.
Thanks,
Jon S.
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 4:09 PM Jon Alan Schmidt
wrote:
> Jerry C., List:
>
> JLR
sh. At least, that is how I see it right now.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:44 PM Clark Goble wrote:
> Worth noting that the
forms are
different Types of the same Sign.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:25 PM Jerry LR Chandler <
jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.
," so I will
probably stick with "Term" unless we come up with a better idea. Frankly,
I might end up reverting to "Seme," since it is the most basic of all
Signs, and thus the root (in more ways than one) of both *seme*iosis and
*seme*iotic.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olath
constitute different *Types*.
As tends to be the case in these kinds of classification exercises, I
suspect that the boundary between "a definitely significant Form" and "an
indefinite significant character" is quite *vague*, such that any sharp
lines we were to draw would
that
particular occasion; i.e., its meaning as its *effect *on a
Quasi-mind--which can be a Feeling, an Exertion, or a further Instance of a
Sign. Since different Quasi-minds can (and often do) have different (and
fallible) Interpretative Habits, different Instances of the same Type can
have
he 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
instance already all those different 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 Sc
er, I would not strictly equate a Term--or a Seme, for that
matter--with a Rheme, since the latter is an incomplete Proposition that
includes the continuous predicate, corresponding to blanks and copulas or
unattached Lines of Identity.
Regards,
Jon S.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 3:36 PM Jon Alan
can (and do) vary widely.
The alternative is to say that the written, spoken, and thought versions of
"man" in English and "homme" in French are six different _ of the same
Type. What would fill the blank here? As far as I can tell, Peirce never
coined any such term.
Re
ith him about this or be
rigidly constrained by it; but it is something that I think we should keep
in mind.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, Jan 23,
con or an Index; and unlike a proposition, a Pheme can be an Index. A
term is a Symbolic Seme, and a proposition is a Symbolic Pheme.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlan
meaning from "continuum."
I am aware of the limitations of my personal tendency to favor the
abstract, and will continue trying to develop more concrete examples to
improve the clarity of the ideas that I seek to convey.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professio
ses term/proposition/argument would seem sufficient. But maybe I'm
> missing something here.
>
> Best,
>
> Gary
>
> *Gary Richmond*
> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
> *Communication Studies*
> *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
> *718
ons involving instances/tokens.
>
> If I'm mistaken in any of this, Jon, I'm certain you'll soon correct me.
>
> Best,
>
> Gary R
>
> *Gary Richmond*
> *Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
> *Communication Studies*
> *LaGuardia College of the City Univ
for the Semes that they involve, and
any isolated Instance (Token) of it is analogous to the discrete point
where those planes and lines intersect.
Is that any more perspicuous?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.Linke
ich is evidently the kernel of the
matter, is no more built out of Propositions than a motion is built out of
positions. (CP 4.572; 1906)
I trust that the loose affinity of this imaginative exercise with Peirce's
Existential Graphs is apparent--Seme line vs. Line of Identity attached to
a Sem
, but they must then be
conceived as merely the parts of some instantaneous state that is an *ens
rationis*; namely, an Instance of a Sign.
I suspect that this all comes across as more settled in my mind than it
actually is. Feedback is welcome, both on this post and on my previous one.
Regards,
hat Universe in its aspect as a sign, the "Truth" of being. The "Truth,"
the fact that is not abstracted but complete, is the ultimate interpretant
of every sign. (EP 2:303-304; 1904)
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran
uished Tokens occurs
within a finite interval of time, reflects the underlying continuity of
semiosis--a term that Peirce invoked, for the first time as far as I can
tell, later in the same manuscript (EP 2:411).
Regards,
Jon S.
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 6:01 PM Jon Alan Schmidt
wrote:
> John S
dispositions of heart which a man ought to have. (CP 2.655,
EP 1:150-151; 1878)
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 9:13 AM Martin
1101 - 1200 of 2278 matches
Mail list logo
