Aw: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-04-01 Thread Helmut Raulien
Jeffrey Downard Associate Professor Department of Philosophy Northern Arizona University (o) 928 523-8354   From: Edwina Taborsky Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 8:11 AM To: Peirce-L; CLARK GOBLE Subject: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term   Clark - OK - I'll put in a long comm

Aw: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-31 Thread Helmut Raulien
who think about axioms as fundamental rules that are beyond doubt.   --Jeff       Jeffrey Downard Associate Professor Department of Philosophy Northern Arizona University (o) 928 523-8354   From: Edwina Taborsky Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 8:11 AM To: Peirce-L; CLARK GOBLE Subject: Re:

Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Jon Alan Schmidt
> Philosophy, University of KwaZulu-Natal > > http://web.ncf.ca/collier > > > > From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca] > Sent: Thursday, 30 March 2017 9:23 PM > To: John Collier > Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu > Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] se

Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Edwina Taborsky
, University of KwaZulu-Natal http://web.ncf.ca/collier [1] From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:tabor...@primus.ca] Sent: Thursday, 30 March 2017 9:23 PM To: John Collier Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term John

Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Jerry Rhee
Thursday, 30 March 2017 9:23 PM > *To:* John Collier <colli...@ukzn.ac.za> > *Cc:* peirce-l@list.iupui.edu > *Subject:* Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term > > > > John - thanks for the quotation. > > I fully agree. The Peircean framework is

RE: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread John Collier
] Sent: Thursday, 30 March 2017 9:23 PM To: John Collier <colli...@ukzn.ac.za> Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term John - thanks for the quotation. I fully agree. The Peircean framework is irreducibly triadic. As he writes, "

Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Edwina Taborsky
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term John C., List: [John Collier] Peirce uses “sign” in both ways, which can be confusing. Perhaps I missed them, but I am not aware of any passages where Peirce used "sign" to mean a

Aw: Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Helmut Raulien
Jon, List, Thank you. So this was another semantic problem, this time with the term "would"!    30. März 2017 um 20:04 Uhr Von: "Jon Alan Schmidt"   Helmut, List:   HR:  Eg. he wrote, that the dynamical object is real, and that it also is the object as a final

Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Edwina Taborsky
Schmidt Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 6:52 AM To: tabor...@primus.ca Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term Edwina, List: Just one (hopefully last) comment here. ET: But a thing that bothers me about some of the focus of this list

Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Jon Alan Schmidt
Helmut, List: HR: Eg. he wrote, that the dynamical object is real, and that it also is the object as a final study would show it to be. I think that the key word here is *would*. The idea is that the real is that which *would *come to be known by an infinite community after indefinite

Aw: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Helmut Raulien
From: Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 6:52 AM To: tabor...@primus.ca Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term   Edwina, List:   Just one (hopefully last) comment here.   ET:  But a thing that bothe

Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Jeffrey Brian Downard
com> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 6:52 AM To: tabor...@primus.ca Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term Edwina, List: Just one (hopefully last) comment here. ET: But a thing that bothers me about some of the focus of this list is its iso

Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Jon Alan Schmidt
Edwina, List: Just one (hopefully last) comment here. ET: But a thing that bothers me about some of the focus of this list is its isolation from reality; that is, it's all about words and definitions. But Peirce wasn't focused on that. Peirce was certainly not *only *focused on words and

Re: RE: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-30 Thread Edwina Taborsky
Alan Schmidt [mailto:jonalanschm...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, 29 March 2017 11:37 PM To: tabor...@primus.ca Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term Edwina, List: It has never been my intention to insult you, and I have

Re: Aw: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-29 Thread Edwina Taborsky
Helmut - the point to remember about Peircean semiosis is that it is dynamic; it sets up an active process of informational transformation. This is non-linear, so it is an error, I feel, to view Peircean semiosis as a step-by-step action, i.e., a linear movement from Object to

Aw: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] semantic problem with the term

2017-03-27 Thread Helmut Raulien
List, Edwina, I think, that there are four kinds of dynamical objects, two of which do not change, one that may change, also due to the sign, and one that changes for sure with every sign that has it for dynamical object: Metaphysical laws and axioms (given they exist) do not change, events and