Claudio, List, Just a small bibliographic collaboration. Cheers, J. LuracClaudio Guerri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jorge, List, I think that (even if I don't know too much about the exact way in which Lacan "met" Peirce) there is no discussion anymore that Lacan is LACAN a
Dear List:
in respect for fund raising for the edition of CSP's papers, the Peirce Edition Project at Indianapolis
is always in search of funds, Nathan Houser and everybody else there are working a lot for the work on
the CSP's papers.
more info can be found at their website:
http://www.iupui.edu
Robert, list,
Robert's "The Syntax of a Class of Signs" (scroll down to see) is
interesting. Robert might helpfully clarify a few things.
1. Robert's conclusion is "We can define the syntax of a classe of signs
as the part of the lattice of the ten classes of signs situated below this
cla
Gary Richmond wrote:
I will let you have the last word. Stay calm.
JO: I am perfectly calm.
well, I took a look at your powerpoint slides and read the article on
the peirce-l site, to see what you meant with "opening your mind". I can
tell that you straight-away that I hadn't missed anythi
Frances to Joe and others...
There is a tendency for me to equate "immediate" or "immediacy" with
all metaphysical quiddities and representamens that are not signs, as
well as with all categorical primaries and firstnesses or firsts and
qualities that exist to sense, but especially to align them w
I will let you have the last word. Stay calm.
JO: I am perfectly calm.
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Gary Richmond wrote:
I am appalled at the fact that one can
confuse
these two aspects, it reveals a complete misunderstanding of Peirce's
categories.
You' are "appalled" at certain scholars' "complete misunderstanding of
Peirce's categories." That is to say, you have closed your
I am appalled at the fact that one can confuse
these two aspects, it reveals a complete misunderstanding of Peirce's
categories.
You' are "appalled" at certain scholars' "complete misunderstanding of
Peirce's categories." That is to say, you have closed your mind to
anything but your own dec
Bernard Morand wrote:
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
Here is an article that I scanned some time ago, it was written by
Andre de Tienne:
http://www.medic.chalmers.se/~jmo/semiotic/Peirce_s_semiotic_monism.pdf
the first page is missing, but I think than anyone interested in
signs and in triadi
Jean-Marc Orliaguet wrote:
Here is an article that I scanned some time ago, it was written by
Andre de Tienne:
http://www.medic.chalmers.se/~jmo/semiotic/Peirce_s_semiotic_monism.pdf
the first page is missing, but I think than anyone interested in signs
and in triadic relations should read
Here is an article that I scanned some time ago, it was written by Andre
de Tienne:
http://www.medic.chalmers.se/~jmo/semiotic/Peirce_s_semiotic_monism.pdf
the first page is missing, but I think than anyone interested in signs
and in triadic relations should read it.
to summarize: being a
11 matches
Mail list logo