Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - ???

List, Helmut, John: Helmut: You bring in the nature of a musical composer into the semantic tensions between the domains of discourse called "Nominal : Realism”. This is most appropriate. Because this moves the conversation into the move general puzzle about how various symbol systems interrel

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - ???

Jerry, John, List, It would be interesting to ask somebody who has been born blind. A word is a string of letters, and a melody a string of sounds. But the perceived thing of a word is a term, and that is not a string. A melody perceived neither is. Maybe to call that, what it is, a picture or a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - ???

It is interesting and clear that there is a spectrum of thinking that goes from images through words. Someone with brain chops will figure that out and create a theory no doubt, But it seems obvious to me that regardless of how anyone thinks words are the basis of the entire crucial area of existe

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - ???

John, List: > On Feb 16, 2017, at 7:17 AM, John Collier wrote: > > From talking with colleagues, some say they think only in words and others, > like me, say they think mostly in diagrams or in physical feelings that I > attach no words to (and probably couldn’t in many cases). Although I am

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

List, I think that I mostly think in diagrams and pictures, even when I think about words. I think that at this point, there is helpful Peirces three modes of consciousness: Primisense, Altersense and Medisense. They are connected with the three categories, and with the three object relations as

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Thanks! Søren From: Jerry Rhee [mailto:jerryr...@gmail.com] Sent: 15. februar 2017 00:29 To: Søren Brier Cc: Clark Goble; Peirce-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Hi Soren, EP 2: 463. Best, Jerry On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:23 PM, Søren Brier mailto:sbr

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Where can I find Peirce’s: An Essay toward Improving our Reasoning in Security and Liberty, from 1913?? Best Søren From: Jerry Rhee [mailto:jerryr...@gmail.com] Sent: 14. februar 2017 21:24 To: Clark Goble Cc: Peirce-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

On Feb 16, 2017, at 6:17 AM, John Collier wrote:One of the hardest things for me in learning analytic philosophy (after original training and work in physics) was to think in words.Yes, the undue focus on the language turn in analytic philosophy has not necessarily been positi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

pui.edu Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Eric, none of the statements that you quoted in your 2/14/2017 message originate with Peirce. Peirce held that logic generally involves icons (including diagrams and not only graphic-looking ones), indices, and symbols, and he saw all

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

, University of KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca] Sent: Thursday, 16 February 2017 3:54 PM To: John Collier ; Benjamin Udell ; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - I fully agree. I think mostly in diagrams and

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 8:17 AM Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - From talking with colleagues, some say they think only in words and others, like me, say they think mostly in diagrams or in physical feelings that I attach no words to

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Eric, none of the statements that you quoted in your 2/14/2017 message originate with Peirce. Peirce held that logic generally involves icons (including diagrams and not only graphic-looking ones), indices, and symbols, and he saw all

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Peirce-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Jerry, Clark, Thank you for the thoughtful replies. I have great love for Peirce and his work. But there are parts that I love less, particularly where Peirce ... seems to me to forget the parameters of his own argument. Peirce tells

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Eric, list: You said: “I have great love for Peirce and his work. But there are parts that I love less, particularly where Peirce ... seems to me to forget the parameters of his own argument.” If there should be inconsistencies in Peirce, my reaction is typically to treat myself as defec

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Words are not merely psychological counters or tokens as it were. They are philosophical in nature because word and language occupy a crucial point in reality. The fundamental action of words is to massively limit the immense reality of the vagueness from which the word springs, somewhat as ovulat

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Eric, none of the statements that you quoted in your 2/14/2017 message originate with Peirce. Peirce held that logic generally involves icons (including diagrams and not only graphic-looking ones), indices, and symbols, and he saw all three kinds of signs as needed. Remember also that Peirce s

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Whoops, neglected the end. > On Feb 15, 2017, at 9:16 AM, Eric Charles > wrote: > > One can readily, for example, find individuals who (by all evidence) seem to > think more readily and more commonly in words than in "images and diagrams". > One can also find people with limited brain damage

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

> On Feb 15, 2017, at 9:16 AM, Eric Charles > wrote: > > Further, when Peirce elsewhere starts making broad pronouncements about > "thought" it oftentimes seems that he is referring solely to those rare > instances of clear thinking, but other times is referring to the typical > thinking, or

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Jerry, Clark, Thank you for the thoughtful replies. I have great love for Peirce and his work. But there are parts that I love less, particularly where Peirce ... seems to me to forget the parameters of his own argument. Peirce tells us what clear thinking is, while fully and responsibly ackno

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

t; *From:* Jerry Rhee [mailto:jerryr...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* 14. februar 2017 21:24 > *To:* Clark Goble > *Cc:* Peirce-L > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > > > > Eric, list: > > > > Here is how I understand the nature of your thought: > >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Eric, list: Here is how I understand the nature of your thought: You consider what effects, that might conceivably have practical bearings, you conceive the object of claiming about the nature of other people’s thoughts to have. Then your conception of these effects, which makes you raise yo

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

> On Feb 14, 2017, at 8:41 AM, Eric Charles > wrote: > > Yikes! My inner William James just raised an eyebrow. This is probably a > separate thread... but how did we suddenly start making claims about the > nature of other people's thoughts? > > "People think, not so much in words, but in i

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Conclusion >> ...with the additional format rules about 'universal', distribution, >> negatives, etc etc..' Nothing to do with words per se. >> >> Words are meaningful, in my view, only in specific contexts; they gain >> their meaning within the context...and

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Professor and Senior Research Associate Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier From: Clark Goble [mailto:cl...@lextek.com] Sent: Tuesday, 14 February 2017 1:48 AM To: Peirce-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - On Feb 11, 2017, at 6:40 PM, John Collier

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

> On Feb 11, 2017, at 6:40 PM, John Collier wrote: > > Full blown logical empiricism arises only with verificationism, which I think > was the biggest error ever made by otherwise sensible philosophers. We are > still suffering the consequences. I hasten to add that, although he was > sometim

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

; p>On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Edwina Taborsky > wrote: > > Sorry, Jerry, I don't agree. It's not the words; it's the format that > counts. People think, not so much in words, but in images and diagrams > > Edwina > > - Original Message -

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

lt;mailto:baud...@gmail.com>; Peirce-L <mailto:peirce-l@list.iupui.edu> *Sent:* Sunday, February 12, 2017 2:02 PM *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Dear Edwina, list: When you say it's not the words but the format that counts; is that like saying, it's not the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

ithin a format. >> >> Edwina >> >> - Original Message - >> *From:* Jerry Rhee >> *To:* Edwina Taborsky >> *Cc:* John Collier ; Benjamin Udell >> ; Peirce-L >> *Sent:* Sunday, February 12, 2017 2:02 PM >> *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L]

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

that >> counts. People think, not so much in words, but in images and diagrams >> >> Edwina >> >> - Original Message - >> *From:* Jerry Rhee >> *To:* Edwina Taborsky >> *Cc:* John Collier ; Benjamin Udell >> ; Peirce-L >> *Sen

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

ry Rhee > *To:* Edwina Taborsky > *Cc:* John Collier ; Benjamin Udell > ; Peirce-L > *Sent:* Sunday, February 12, 2017 2:02 PM > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > > Dear Edwina, list: > > When you say it's not the words but the format that counts;

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

contexts; they gain their meaning within the context...and the context operates within a format. Edwina - Original Message - From: Jerry Rhee To: Edwina Taborsky Cc: John Collier ; Benjamin Udell ; Peirce-L Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 2:02 PM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] No

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

c:* John Collier ; Benjamin Udell > ; Peirce-L > *Sent:* Sunday, February 12, 2017 1:25 PM > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > > Dear list: > > > > If words are only birds, then: > > > > “CP 5.189 is NOT a syllogism!” > > > >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2017 1:25 PM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Dear list: If words are only birds, then: “CP 5.189 is NOT a syllogism!” “CP 5.189 is not *the* pragmatic maxim, nor even *a* pragmatic maxim in the same sense, so it is certainly not *the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

it ignores what's going on within that > semiosic action. > > Edwina > > - Original Message - > *From:* John Collier > *To:* Benjamin Udell ; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu > *Sent:* Saturday, February 11, 2017 8:40 PM > *Subject:* RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Real

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

riginal Message - From: John Collier To: Benjamin Udell ; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2017 8:40 PM Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Interesting, Ben. How words change in meaning and connotation. Although mist of the negative references a

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

: Saturday, 11 February 2017 10:35 PM To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - Even in the days of the Century Dictionary (late 19th to early 20th Century), "empiric" and "empirical" had rather negative connotations. See the definitions of &

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

to tie empiricism to > the use of the word are pretty poor examples of scholarship. > > John Collier > Emeritus Professor and Senior Research Associate Philosophy, University of > KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier > > > -Original Message- > > From: kirst...@sa

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Professor and Senior Research Associate Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier > -Original Message- > From: kirst...@saunalahti.fi [mailto:kirst...@saunalahti.fi] > Sent: Saturday, 11 February 2017 5:58 PM > To: Jerry LR Chandler > Cc

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

John: > On Feb 11, 2017, at 1:06 PM, John Collier wrote: > > In any case, the recent attempts on this list to try to tie empiricism to the > use of the word are pretty poor examples of scholarship. > This is even more surprising! What is it about the concept of a “word” that bothers you so

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

LR Chandler > Cc: Edwina Taborsky ; John Collier > ; Peirce-L > Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > > I share your surprise, Jerry. > > Kirsti > > Jerry LR Chandler kirjoitti 5.2.2017 19:26: > > John, Edwina, List: > > > > I

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

emes of both empiricism and idealism. Edwina - Original Message - FROM: John Collier TO: Edwina Taborsky ; Peirce-L SENT: Sunday, February 05, 2017 11:12 AM SUBJECT: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - I don’t agree. Edwina. Empiricism started in the Middle ages and went through periods of pro

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

Hi John, I just wish to remind that Pythagoreans brought together music and measurement. Ancient Greek tradition did not start with Plato and Aristotle. - The monochord, together with the idea of Universal Lyra was the srarting point to both Plato and Aristotle. Which is full accord with pos

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

> On Feb 6, 2017, at 7:19 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Yes, I agree with your outline of the neglect of Aristotle during the period > when the Church controlled knowledge - and the 13th c. re-emergence of his > works [Aquinas etc].. I’m not sure it’s quite that simple. A lot of the texts, f

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

> On Feb 5, 2017, at 11:12 PM, John F Sowa wrote: > > At the beginning of the 13th c, the translations of Aristotle > were denounced by theologians who had a vested interest in Plato. > The fact that they were translated from Arabic sources also raised > suspicions of heresy. But scientists suc

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

On 2/6/2017 9:19 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: I myself tend to view causality as more economic and population-size driven than ideologically driven. I agree. In fact, that's a major reason why the Homo saps were so far ahead of the neanderthals in technology: they had a warmer climate in Africa

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

e World', which focuses on economics, city-states, and technology. Ideologically - one saw the emergence of a focus on the individual capacity to observe and reason. Edwina ----- Original Message - From: "John F Sowa" To: Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 1:12 AM Subject: Re: [P

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

On 2/5/2017 12:38 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: that knowledge is derived from the evidence of the senses, is as old as Aristotle - who espoused just that [along with the use of reason]. But as a societal force, with its insistence that the individual and that individual's direct contact with the w

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

for the historical emergence of the term in philosophy.I'm sure > someone can answer that. > > Edwina > - Original Message - > From: Jerry LR Chandler > To: Edwina Taborsky > Cc: John Collier ; Peirce-L > Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 12:26 PM > Subject

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

re someone can answer that. Edwina - Original Message - From: Jerry LR Chandler To: Edwina Taborsky Cc: John Collier ; Peirce-L Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 12:26 PM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - John, Edwina, List: I am more than a bit surpri

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

very well to disempower the > extremes of both empiricism and idealism. > > Edwina > - Original Message ----- > From: John Collier > To: Edwina Taborsky ; Peirce-L > Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 11:12 AM > Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - > >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

r To: Edwina Taborsky ; Peirce-L Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 11:12 AM Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - I don’t agree. Edwina. Empiricism started in the Middle ages and went through periods of profound social transformation since while being changed relatively li

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

, University of KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca] Sent: Sunday, 05 February 2017 5:58 PM To: John Collier ; Peirce-L Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - I think that even a philosophical ideology , eg, the 'classic form of empir

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism -

er To: Jerry LR Chandler Cc: Peirce List ; Eric Charles ; Helmut Raulien Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2017 3:18 AM Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - “The union of units unifies the unity” Jerry, I think we are using ‘empiricism’ differently. I was using it in the cla

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - “The union of units unifies the unity”

] Nominalism vs. Realism - “The union of units unifies the unity” John, List: On Jan 31, 2017, at 1:05 AM, John Collier mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za>> wrote: 5. The assertion "Empiricists typically claim that we don't need anything more to do science.” appears rather problematic to

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

hn Collier ; Peirce List Cc: Eric Charles ; Helmut Raulien Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism John, List: On Jan 31, 2017, at 1:05 AM, John Collier mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za>> wrote: 2. Now, for the most important comment. It is almost certain that CSP's notion of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism - “The union of units unifies the unity”

John, List: > On Jan 31, 2017, at 1:05 AM, John Collier wrote: > > 5. The assertion "Empiricists typically claim that we don't need anything > more to do science.” appears rather problematic to me. > > I don’t see this, Jerry. A typical example of a contemporary empiricist who > argues spec

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

John, List: > On Jan 31, 2017, at 1:05 AM, John Collier wrote: > > 2. Now, for the most important comment. It is almost certain that CSP’s > notion of abduction as a method to generate a possibility space came directly > from the concept of proof of structure. It follows from his notion

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

://web.ncf.ca/collier From: Jerry LR Chandler [mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@mac.com] Sent: Tuesday, 31 January 2017 6:09 AM To: John Collier ; Peirce List Cc: Eric Charles ; Helmut Raulien Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism John: Thanks for your interesting and provocative insights. By way

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

<https://aka.ms/ghei36> > > From: Jerry LR Chandler > Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 9:51:30 PM > To: Eric Charles > Cc: Peirce List; Helmut Raulien > Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism > > Eric: > >> On Jan 28, 2017, at 4:23 PM, Helmut Raulie

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 12:28 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > Regarding #2, once again you insist on assigning a pejorative label to my > view. It is not Platonic, it is Aristotelian (and Peircean), since I clearly > and consistently affirm that 3ns does not exist apart from 2ns (and 1ns).

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 1:05 PM, Eric Charles > wrote: > > Well... that seems like a different sort of issue. That is a straight forward > issue of whether we exist in a deterministic world, and that can't be > nominalist-realist distinction, can it? Even if this isn’t a deterministic world

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 9:57 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > But I don't think that Peirce argued that the laws/symmetries are real, > 'independent of the objects' for wouldn't that be similar to 'logically > prior'??. My view is that the laws are real, as general operational forces > but they

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 10:16 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > What you quoted from Clark was his description of "a very nominalist > conception of thermodynamics." By contrast, I think that Peirce quite > clearly held (1) that the mental (psychical law) is primordial relative to > the mater

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Eric, List: With respect to probability, I am reminded (for obvious reasons) of this passage. CSP: According to what has been said, the idea of probability essentially belongs to a kind of inference which is repeated indefinitely. An individual inference must be either true or false, and can sho

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Jon, many thanks! Adding to the discussion: Does that mean that if I told a nominalist that if I repeatedly shuffled a > deck of cards, and then looked at the top card, there was a 1/4 *chance* > of drawing a heart, they would say I was talking gibberish? > > JAS: Probably not; but once you have

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

not a Platonist - and your > view is Platonic.\ > That's all I'll say on this; I won't get into a debate. > > Edwina > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jon Alan Schmidt > *To:* Edwina Taborsky > *Cc:* Peirce-L > *Sent:* Monday, January 30,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

latonic.\ That's all I'll say on this; I won't get into a debate. Edwina - Original Message - From: Jon Alan Schmidt To: Edwina Taborsky Cc: Peirce-L Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 12:16 PM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism Edwina, List:

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Eric, List: Responses inserted below. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Eric Charles wrote: > Jon, > As I understand you,

Fwd: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

John, That first bit - on *ontological misogyny*, etc. - is fascinating and clever! As a skewering of Quine et al, it seems to work well. However, for the purposes of this discussion, it might be a bit of a bait and switch. Let us assume our antagonist is a misogynist, and that he will set it upo

Fwd: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

non-individual general continuity. >> Your attempts to confine Peirce to your discipline of chemistry, I think, >> narrow his work. >> >> Edwina >> >> Edwina. >> >> - Original Message - >> *From:* Jon Alan Schmidt >> *To:* E

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

way]. > > Edwina > > ----- Original Message - > *From:* Clark Goble > *To:* Peirce-L > *Sent:* Monday, January 30, 2017 11:23 AM > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism > > On Jan 29, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > I would not

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

are real, as general operational forces but they have no power/reality except as 'articulated' within the objects. [This may be what you meant anyway]. Edwina - Original Message - From: Clark Goble To: Peirce-L Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 11:23 AM Subject: Re: [

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

> On Jan 29, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > I would not call it a "force," but I agree that the traditional debate is > about whether there is something real (hence "realism") that all rabbits have > in common to make them rabbits vs. "rabbits" merely being a name (hence >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

> On Jan 27, 2017, at 4:19 PM, Eric Charles > wrote: > > I must admit that I find much of the recent discussion baffling. In part, > this is because I have never had anyone explain the Nominalism-Realism > distinction in a way that made sense to me. Don't get me wrong, I think I > understand

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

nuary 29, 2017 8:35 PM To: Jeffrey Brian Downard Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism Jeffrey, I found this particular message of yours to be quite inspiring in explaining the value of philosophical inquiry to non-philosophers. Would you have any good examples of how these two metaphy

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs Realism

Edwinia: Your horrendous mis-representation of the meaning of my sentence kills all desire to explore this issue. Cheers Jerry > On Jan 29, 2017, at 5:13 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Jerry Chandler - calm down. You are evading the issue, which is, that you > claimed that 'many, if no

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

phy Northern Arizona University (o) 928 523-8354 From: John Collier [colli...@ukzn.ac.za] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 8:01 AM To: John F Sowa; peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism Quite, John. I could have been more c

RE: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

F Sowa [mailto:s...@bestweb.net] > Sent: Monday, 30 January 2017 4:33 PM > To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu > Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism > > > Peirce's contribution was to recognize that Kant's synthetic a priori could be > replaced by abduction. Th

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

John C and Edwina, JC Nominalism is a weaker hypothesis than Realism, so if something is consistent with realism, then it is consistent with nominalism. Locke, for example, distinguished between the nominal essence and the real essence. The former tells us what we think something is like, while

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Collier To: Jerry LR Chandler ; Eric Charles Cc: Peirce List ; Helmut Raulien Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 5:36 AM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism Jerry, List, Nominalism is a weaker hypothesis than Realism, so if something is consistent with realism, then it is

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Eric Charles Cc: Peirce List; Helmut Raulien Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism Eric: On Jan 28, 2017, at 4:23 PM, Helmut Raulien mailto:h.raul...@gmx.de>> wrote: In my view of sytems theory, a system is more than it´s parts, of course, and what is more, is real and natural. But

[PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs Realism

Jerry Chandler - calm down. You are evading the issue, which is, that you claimed that 'many, if not most, biosemioticians are nominalists.' I question this claim, since biosemiotics is based around the semiosis of Peirce - which rejects nominalism. So I ask yet again, what's your evidence for

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

8 523-8354 From: Eric Charles Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2017 10:18 AM To: Jeffrey Brian Downard Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism Jeff, Thank you for the thoughtful answer. (And Jon for the links.) It will take me a bit to digest and respond. My

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

> On Jan 29, 2017, at 2:21 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Jerry - my, I didn't know that you consider all biosemioticians to be > nominalists. Edwinia: Neither did I! Edwinia, this is just plain sloppy usage of language. I wrote: "Nevertheless, it appears to me, that many, if not most, b

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

re strong >> Peirceans and focus on that level of non-individual general continuity. >> Your attempts to confine Peirce to your discipline of chemistry, I think, >> narrow his work. >> >> Edwina >> >> Edwina. >> >> - Original Message - >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

ity. > Your attempts to confine Peirce to your discipline of chemistry, I think, > narrow his work. > > Edwina > > Edwina. > > ----- Original Message - > *From:* Jon Alan Schmidt > *To:* Edwina Taborsky > *Cc:* Eric Charles ; Peirce-L > > *Sent:* Sunday,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

hemistry, I think, narrow his work. Edwina Edwina. - Original Message - From: Jon Alan Schmidt To: Edwina Taborsky Cc: Eric Charles ; Peirce-L Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2017 2:57 PM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism Edwina, Eric, List: I would not call i

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Edwina, Eric, List: I would not call it a "force," but I agree that the traditional debate is about whether there is something *real *(hence "realism") that all rabbits have in common to make them rabbits vs. "rabbits" merely being a *name *(hence "nominalism") that we apply to many different indi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Eric: > On Jan 28, 2017, at 4:23 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote: > > In my view of sytems theory, a system is more than it´s parts, of course, and > what is more, is real and natural. But in my opinion "natural" does not mean > "good for us". A sytem that contains other systems, Beyond statistics

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Eric and list, EC My initial inclination is to say that everything you pointed to does seem important, but doesn't seem obviously to hinge on anything I can easily understand as a difference between nominalists and realists The simplest explanation I have ever read was by Alonzo Church -- in a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

l valid, even if contradictory. So - with Peirce [and others] we have acknowledged that continuity of type suggests a real force that is articulated/instantiated in 'tokens' of that force. That, in my view, is the nature of realism. Edwina ----- Original Message - From: Er

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Eric, List: I think that you have hit upon something that I recently brought up here--why Peirce consistently preferred "general" to "universal" when discussing realism vs. nominalism. It is related to his broad use of "habit," even when referring to "laws of nature." These terms convey the idea

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Jon, With regards to the second point, on whether there might not be natural laws, I was thinking about things like "Order of nature", in which Peirce points out that: "If we could find out any general characteristic of the universe, any mannerism in the ways of Nature, any law everywhere applicabl

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Eric, List: Actually, Peirce's definition of "real" was being such as it is regardless of what any person or finite group of people thinks about it. Taken to the third (pragmatic) grade of clarity, the "real" is that which *would *be the object of the "final opinion"--the consensus of an indefini

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

goals as seeking more power, wealth and fame. Plato and Aristotle saw >> these sorts of trends as harmful for the vitality of their classical Greek >> culture. I believe that the growing prominence of these same sorts of >> trends are equally harmful for the vitality of our own cont

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

    Supp-supplement: In my view of sytems theory, a system is more than it´s parts, of course, and what is more, is real and natural. But in my opinion "natural" does not mean "good for us". A sytem that contains other systems, like a society that contains individuals, or their communications, co

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

the use of nuclear weapons, etc.--to more immediate >> questions about how they can employ various means in the focused pursuit of >> such goals as seeking more power, wealth and fame. Plato and Aristotle saw >> these sorts of trends as harmful for the vitality of their classical Greek >> culture. I believe that the g

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

mporary culture. > > Yours, > > Jeff > > > > Jeffrey Downard > Associate Professor > Department of Philosophy > Northern Arizona University > (o) 928 523-8354 > > From: Jon Alan Schmidt [jonalanschm...@gmail.com] > Sent

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

Jon, Interesting! Dropping the answers in terms of the offending terms: - Is there anything real that cannot, in principle, be known by humans? The pragmatist says "no", on account of that not being what the term "real" means. Real things are just those things that have effects, and effects a

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nominalism vs. Realism

    Supplement: A third point is being introduced by Eugene Halton in his post just sent: Nominalism claims, that social affairs are not real/natural. Eugene presents for example Hume´s view that only human egocentrism is natural, as only the individual is real, and therefore a strong state gove

  1   2   >