;
Dato: mandag den 4. maj 2015 18.45
Til: Peirce-L 1 mailto:PEIRCE-L@list.iupui.edu>>
Cc: Frederik Stjernfelt mailto:stj...@hum.ku.dk>>
Emne: Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: [biosemiotics:8567] Re: Natural
List, Frederik:
On May 4, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Howard Pattee wrote:
How do the Peircean signs an
...@roadrunner.com]
Sent: May 5, 2015 10:56 AM
To: Gary Fuhrman; biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee; 'Peirce-L 1'
Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] RE: [biosemiotics:8567] Re: Natural
At 08:57 AM 5/5/2015, Gary Fuhrman wrote:
306 in NP is actually a blank page, so I don't have the context here.
y 4, 2015 9:46 AM
To: Gary Fuhrman; biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee; 'Peirce-L 1'
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: [biosemiotics:8567] Re: Natural
At 09:49 AM 5/2/2015, Gary Fuhrman wrote:
Frederik, you wrote,
[So here I agree with Howard (and I guess P would do so as well) that
the right direction is to
'Peirce-L 1'
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] RE: [biosemiotics:8567] Re: Natural
At 09:49 AM 5/2/2015, Gary Fuhrman wrote:
Frederik, you wrote,
[So here I agree with Howard (and I guess P would do so as well) that the right
direction is to generalize the observer-phenomenon distinction
Seems to me that in a triad you are acknowledging that it is a unity and
that everything in it is subsumed to the point that such things as subject
and object are if there at all blurred. The object of a triad might be seen
as an expression, an action or both, following the Pragmatic Maxim -- the
List, Frederik:
On May 4, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Howard Pattee wrote:
> How do the Peircean signs and triads avoid facing the subject-object relation
> (which Peirce himself called "obscure and mysterious")?
Howard has posed an excellent and incisive question with far-ranging
implications! Thanks
At 09:49 AM 5/2/2015, Gary Fuhrman wrote:
Frederik, you wrote,
[So here I agree with Howard (and I guess P would do so as well) that the
right direction is to generalize the observer-phenomenon distinction so
as to cover all biological organisms.]
GF: I agree about the right direction, but I don
