Department of Philosophy
Northern Arizona University
(o) 928 523-8354
-------------
From: Helmut Raulien
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 10:34 AM
To: tabor...@primus.ca
Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu; Jeffrey Brian Downard
Subject: Aw: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and
of nature and the systems that are governed by these laws are more
> plausible than those that fit the models of A-C and F.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> --Jeff
> Jeffrey Downard
> Associate Professor
> Department of Philosophy
> Northern Arizona University
> (o) 928 523-83
hern Arizona University
(o) 928 523-8354
From: Helmut Raulien
Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 10:34 AM
To: tabor...@primus.ca
Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu; Jeffrey Brian Downard
Subject: Aw: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate
Opinion (was To put an end .
Edwina, Jon, Robert, Jeff, List,
I am wondering about the difference between Telos and Purpose: Is it so, that Telos is a Purpose, but not one of the individual´s mind, but of a mind of a system on another classificational level, or, speaking with Salthe, at another subsumption level? Then the
Jeff, list
I'm going to quibble with you that Peirce and Monod have entirely
different views - on metaphysics or otherwise. I consider them
compatible.
I've used Monod in my own work in semiosis and for a reason - I felt
he supported Peirce's agapistic view of the devel
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}Robert, list
Thank you so much for an absolutely perfect outline and analysis of
the hexadic semiosic process.
Edwina
On Wed 20/05/20 10:28 AM , robert marty robert.mart...@gmail.com
sent:
Thank
