Edwina and Mary L,
I agree with the points that both of you
have made.
ET> It is extremely difficult to come to a final
conclusion about which meaning is 'right'.
For an essay or book
about Peirce, it's important to discuss his original terminology and not
claim that any of the 21st c. terms ar
Mary, List,
This appeared on my Facebook page (Charles S. Peirce Society) shortly after
I read your message today and I thought you might find it of interest:
The question being responded to below was, why did Peirce's "theory of
semiotics . . . go unnoticed in James's radical empiricism"?
Eric
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}John, Gary, list
I think that's an important point: John wrote:
"When we're writing textual criticism of Peirce's writings, it's
essential to preserve the exact terms that occur in each quoted
passage. B
John and list,
You wrote: "Peirce's ethics of terminology is important. But he made an
important distinction: If an author's term is adopted and used by other
authors, then the person who coined that term has an obligation to continue
using it in the same sense in which it is being used. But
Gary R and Jon AS,
Peirce's ethics of terminology is important.
But he made an important distinction: If an author's term is adopted and
used by other authors, then the person who coined that term has an
obligation to continue using it in the same sense in which it is being
used. But if nobod
Jon AS, List
I've been writing a paper with a tight
deadline and haven't had time to write longer emails. And this subject
gets into too many issues to be discussed briefly.
JAS>
For whatever reason, Peirce more commonly employed "mathematical
logic," "logic of mathematics," or "mathematic
John, List:
Although I am not interested in having another debate about Peirce's
classification of the sciences, I would like to offer a few comments on
this subject.
JFS: If he had consistently used the four combinations "formal logic",
"formal semiotic", "normative logic", and "normative semio
Jon A, List,
I strongly agree with those two points:
JA
1> It's been my observation over many decades that people invoke the
"ethics of terminology" mainly to inveigh against everyone's
innovations but their own
Yes indeed. I have experienced that kind
of criticism. That's why I'm using Peir
Jon A, List,
On the following point, we are in complete
agreement:
JA> as far as my personal usage goes, I've
always suggested there is a place for descriptive semiotics, whether of
not that was Peirce's way of drawing the distinctions.
The
great logician Frank Ramsey used the term 'human lo
Jon A, List
I very strongly agree with the following two
points:
JA 1> There appears to be some sort of
disagreement, or maybe just failure to communicate, but I'm still having
trouble putting my finger on what the source of the issue might
be.
I believe that the source of the problem lies i
10 matches
Mail list logo
