Jon, List:
Thanks for the link. Very Informative. I now understand the nature of your
post. Thanks for spending the time and effort to generate the summary of this
paper.
The perspective of the paper is such that it seeks to place CSP within the
author’s views of philosophies of truth. So,
Jerry:
Almeder provided lots of quotes/citations from Peirce, but I do not have
time to go through and post them all. I suggest that you obtain a copy of
the article if you would still like to see the references.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/40320077
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas,
ment of Philosophy
> Northern Arizona University
> (o) 928 523-8354
>
>
> From: Jon Alan Schmidt
> Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 1:06 PM
> To: Jerry LR Chandler
> Cc: Peirce List
> Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and Boscovich
> points.
>
On 3/10/2017 8:57 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
By contrast, Peirce's realism recognizes that "correspondence,
coherence, consensus, and instrumental reliability are all essential
and constitutive elements of truth--none is any more fundamental than
the others. Moreover, each of these elements of
> On Mar 10, 2017, at 6:57 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt
> wrote:
>
> In chapter 8 of Peirce and the Threat of Nominalism, Paul Forster
> argues--convincingly, I think--that the different "theories of truth" are
> competitors only within a nominalist epistemology and metaphysics. By
> contrast, Pei
Clark, Jeff, List:
In chapter 8 of *Peirce and the Threat of Nominalism*, Paul Forster
argues--convincingly, I think--that the different "theories of truth" are
competitors only within a nominalist epistemology and metaphysics. By
contrast, Peirce's realism recognizes that "correspondence, coher
> On Mar 9, 2017, at 3:17 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard
> wrote:
>
> With respect to the 13 items on the list. None is, taken by itself, a theory
> of truth. Rather, they are statements made by a commentator on passages in
> the published works and manuscripts, many of which are from different
>
) 928 523-8354
From: Jon Alan Schmidt
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 1:06 PM
To: Jerry LR Chandler
Cc: Peirce List
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and Boscovich
points.
Jerry C., List:
Almeder's 1985 Transactions article, &quo
Jeff and Jerry,
Everything in Peirce's philosophy is related to everything else.
This thread could fan out in all directions, and I have work to do.
So I'll just end my contribution with a couple of short comments
and a copy of the summary from the end of my previous note:
JFS
Summary: What I'
Jerry C., List:
Almeder's 1985 *Transactions *article, "Peirce's Thirteen Theories of
Truth," does not spell out the list very clearly, but here is what I gather
from the text.
1. Correspondence - "true propositions are simply the product of the
destined final opinion of the scientific comm
> On Mar 9, 2017, at 1:29 PM, Eugene Halton wrote:
>
> In your post you say, “Doing mathematics in a more scientific spirit
> requires, it seems, an understanding of the purposes that govern the
> activities and the methods that should be employed.” Why? Who cares, as long
> as the math is go
d above.
>
> --Jeff
>
>
> Jeffrey Downard
> Associate Professor
> Department of Philosophy
> Northern Arizona University
> (o) 928 523-8354 <(928)%20523-8354>
>
> From: John F Sowa
> Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 7:
List:
In her book, Charles Peirces’s Pragmatic Pluralism, Rosenthal states:
… the literature on Peirce contains “no fewer than thirteen distinct
interpretations of Peirce’s views on the nature of truth”, attributing the
account to Robert Almeder.
She apparently intends contrast CSP’s concept
Peirce-L; Clark Goble
Cc: Benjamin Udell; Frederik Stjernfelt; Jeffrey Brian Downard; Jeffrey
Goldstein; Jon Alan Schmidt; Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and Boscovich
points.
Jerry, Clark, list,
In my response to Jeff B.D., I was defending the
Jerry, Clark, list,
In my response to Jeff B.D., I was defending the claim that board
games are versions of mathematics. But I definitely do *not* restrict
math to board games or to set-theoretic models.
Jerry
Many mathematicians reject set theory as a foundation for mathematics
Yes. Peirce
; Jeffrey Goldstein ; Jon Alan
Schmidt ; Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen
; John F Sowa
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and Boscovich
points.
John:
CSP’s interpretation of Boscovich’ian atoms was unique to CSP, at least that is
my reading. I could find the CSP text if it is
: Benjamin Udell ; Frederik Stjernfelt
> ; Jeffrey Brian Downard ; Jeffrey
> Goldstein ; Jon Alan Schmidt
> ; Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen
> ; John F Sowa
> Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and Boscovich
> points.
>
> List, John:
>
>
Brian Downard ; Jeffrey Goldstein
; Jon Alan Schmidt ;
Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen ; John F Sowa
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and Boscovich
points.
List, John:
I’m rather pressed for time so only brief responses to your highly provocative
post.
Clearly, your
> On Mar 7, 2017, at 9:10 PM, John F Sowa wrote:
>
> On 3/7/2017 3:19 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard wrote:
>> pure mathematics starts from a set of hypotheses of a particular sort,
>> and it does not seem obvious to me that these games are grounded
>> on such hypotheses.
>
> More precisely, pure ma
List, John:
I’m rather pressed for time so only brief responses to your highly provocative
post.
Clearly, your philosophy of mathematics is pretty main stream relative to mine.
But this is neither the time nor the place to develop these critical
differences.
My post was aimed directly at th
On 3/8/2017 12:10 AM, Jeffrey Brian Downard wrote:
I'm trying to interpret Peirce's remarks about the importance
of stating the mathematical hypotheses of a system precisely
for the purpose of drawing conclusions with exactitude.
I certainly agree. And the point I was trying to make is that
th
___________
> From: John F Sowa
> Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 9:10 PM
> To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
> Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and
> Boscovich points.
>
> On 3/7/2017 3:19 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard wrote:
> >
edu
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and Boscovich
points.
On 3/7/2017 3:19 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard wrote:
> pure mathematics starts from a set of hypotheses of a particular sort,
> and it does not seem obvious to me that these games are grounded
> o
On 3/7/2017 3:19 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard wrote:
pure mathematics starts from a set of hypotheses of a particular sort,
and it does not seem obvious to me that these games are grounded
on such hypotheses.
More precisely, pure mathematics starts with axioms and definitions.
A hypothesis is a st
handler; Peirce List; John F Sowa
> *Cc:* Benjamin Udell; Frederik Stjernfelt; Jeffrey Brian Downard; Jeffrey
> Goldstein; Jon Alan Schmidt; Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen
> *Subject:* Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity and
> Boscovich points.
>
>
>
&g
dwina Taborsky
Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 8:54 AM
To: Jerry LR Chandler; Peirce List; John F Sowa
Cc: Benjamin Udell; Frederik Stjernfelt; Jeffrey Brian Downard; Jeffrey
Goldstein; Jon Alan Schmidt; Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen
Subject: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Truth as Regulative or Real; Continuity a
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
John Sowa - very nice outline of 'thinking', which is, as you say,
diagrammatic. And as you say, independent of any language or
notation. The ability of the human species to 'symbolize', i.e., to
transform that diagramm
Jerry,
We already have a universal foundation for logic. It's called
"Peirce's semiotic".
JLRC
the mathematics of the continuous can not be the same as the
mathematics of the discrete. Nor can the mathematics of the
discrete become the mathematics of the continuous.
They are all subsets of w
Supplement:
Is there a crisis of systems theory, like I am feeling? If so, I have the hunch, that the reason for that is the blunt "Network" metaphor, whose wide use blocks the inquiry about structures, scales, continuity, processes, and so on. I feel, that the "Network" concept is normative
List,
I guess it might help to talk about time (and space) scales now, and about systems hierarchies with the sytems having different time (and space) scales. I think that synechism is connected to (Peircean) monism.
Eg. the dualism of mind and matter: Matter is effete mind. "Effete" is an unusu
List, John:
> On Mar 3, 2017, at 1:37 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>
> I am having a hard time following your thought process here,
Yes, you certainly do.
And, I can identify several conjectures why this is the case.
At the top of the list of conjectures are the modes of explanation of abst
List, Jon:
The notion of “two-ness” has many forms.
Cheers
jerry
> On Mar 3, 2017, at 1:37 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>
> Jerry C., List:
>
> I am having a hard time following your thought process here, but I suspect
> that you may be confusing dualism with dichotomy; Peirce rejected the
Jerry C., List:
I am having a hard time following your thought process here, but I suspect
that you may be confusing *dualism* with *dichotomy*; Peirce rejected the
former, but not the latter. *Dualism *is the view that there are two
different kinds of substances in the universe, usually identifi
Ben:
> On Mar 3, 2017, at 11:26 AM, Benjamin Udell wrote:
>
> In the sense that the regulatory principle itself is a continuum, it will not
> harbor or have room for Boscovichian points (point masses that can physically
> attract and repel), since it is not a physical continuum in the first pl
Jon, List:
> On Mar 2, 2017, at 7:36 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>
> Jerry C., LIst:
>
> Peirce makes it very clear elsewhere (and repeatedly) that a true continuum
> does not contain any points or other definite, indivisible parts. He defines
> it as that which has indefinite parts, all of
Jerry, Jon S, list,
Jerry, you wrote,
In MS 647, he compares a fact with "a chemical principle extracted
therefrom by the power of Thought;” That is, the notion of a fact
is in the past tense. It is completed and has an identity. It is
no longer is question about the nature of wh
Jerry C., LIst:
Peirce makes it very clear elsewhere (and repeatedly) that a *true *continuum
does not contain *any *points or other definite, indivisible parts. He
defines it as that which has *indefinite *parts, all of which have parts of
the same kind, such that it is *undivided* yet infinitel
List, Ben:
Your recent posts contribute to a rather curious insight into CSP’s beliefs
about the relationships between mathematics, chemistry and logic of scientific
hypotheses.
> On Mar 2, 2017, at 10:58 AM, Benjamin Udell wrote:
>
> from MS 647 (1910) which appeared in Sandra B. Rosenthal
38 matches
Mail list logo
