Jon Alen, list,
I don't see how the quote you provide could lead to the insetion of 'of the
scroll' after interpretation. I don't see any reason for it in that text.
It is very well posssible and more probable given the remark on common sense
and logicians that Peirce was pointing to a
John, All:
JFS: My guess: He reviewed his earlier writings on EGs, especially the
ones from 1903 and 1906. The content of R670 and L231 shows what he
rejected.
No, it shows what he chose to *emphasize *in June 1911. He did not
explicitly *reject *anything that he had written previously
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
Jon AS, List
This thread began with my note of August 2nd,
which I include below in the file 2aug20.txt. All the points in that note
are based on the citations included in it. But I changed the subject line
of this note to emphasize Peirce's fundamental insight of 2 June 1911
shortly after
