Ben says:
BU: Jim below says things pretty near to that which I'm saying in
terms of the distinction between object and sign, andit seems that the
"bad regression" stuff that I've said about his previous stuff no longer
applies.
JR: Perhaps it never did.
BU: Object and signs are roles.
Benjamin Udell wrote:
Object and
signs are roles. They are logical roles, and their distinction is a
logical distinction
As I see it, it's not that simple because of the dynamical object, the
fact of inter-communication as well as internal inference, etc.
Charles may
Joe, list,
Joe, I don't know why it seems to you like I'm suddenly releasing a "tirade
of verbal dazzle." The prose there looks pretty mundane to me and I certainly
didn't mean it intimidate you. Generally when I write such prose I'm just trying
to present links in arguments, keep from
Gary, Charles, Joe, Jim,
Jacob, list,
[Ben] Object and signs are roles. They are logical roles, and their
distinction is a logical distinction
[Gary] As I see it, it's not that simple because of the dynamical
object, the fact of inter-communication as well as internal inference,
etc.
I
