Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs, CSP's Procrustean Bed?

2017-04-13 Thread Edwina Taborsky
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }Jon, list - yes, makes sense. Yes - I meant the internal Sign triadAnd yes, the three correlates are in 'other Sign relations'enables diversity Edwina -- This message is virus free, protected by Primus

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs, CSP's Procrustean Bed?

2017-04-13 Thread Jon Alan Schmidt
Edwina, List: ET: In a triadic spot/rhema/proposition which has three 'loose ends' or blank forms - which means, as I understand it, that it is open to being filled by some subject. So far, so good. The triadic Sign relation has three loose ends, which are filled by three subjects--the Sign i

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs, CSP's Procrustean Bed?

2017-04-13 Thread Edwina Taborsky
Jerry, list - as someone with no background in chemistry, I have a few questions: 1) I understand your analysis using the 'doctrine of valency' in chemistry and, as you point out, Peirce was a chemist. Now, in Robert's, p.115, he shows several figures - and figure 3 'represents triadic