r way some meaningful -relationship among the methods. Some
conceptual link -- and I think his categories are one way of exporing
those relationships.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Folks,
For those interested in Peirce's contributions to
experimental psychology and its connection to the work of Fechner this looks
like an excellent reference. The book is called The Wave Theory of
Difference and Similarity. I have not read it myself but have been
skimming some of it
ility of Induction which apparently was published Popular Science
Monthly.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
The question then becomes how inquiry relates to these ideas. I'd
suggest, as you do, that it would cut off inquiry, but not because of
knowledge. Rather, as Joe said earl
y. Maybe I'm just being overly commited to what I feel is
the case --unwilling to acknowledge either fact or
reason.
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Joseph Ransdell
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 1:10
PM
Subject: [peirce-l]
tanding to speak otherwise.
So bottom line -- yes, I agree with your
comments and those of Joe. Just trying to process them a bit.
Thanks again,
Jim Piat
Jim P,
Thanks for the response. I think that if you allow for the evolution
of the mean and stick to the scientific me
dically revisit old discussions.
Thanks again,
Jim Piat
-
Original Message From: Joseph Ransdell
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2006 10:10:02
PMSubject: [peirce-l] Re: What
Jim:I
think your thesis about the trut
man behavior that is in my view every bit the equal or
superior of that produced by other social
science approaches. A psychologist who wants to understand
interpersonal relations and our society at large could do worse than
to study contract and property law.
Best wishes and thanks,
Jim Piat
gress in understanding. Curious what others might
think of these borrowed (and probably misapplied) ideas.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Hi, Jim,
I read at gmane about Arnold Shepperson's death. Would you do me a favor and
tell peirce-l that I too am shocked and saddened by this. I've just re-read
some off-list correspondence that I had with him back in February, and I'm
not quite sure at the moment what either one of us was
d day.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
well as in analyzing the
problems of our individual lives. And not just interpersonal problems, the
problems we face with our enviroment as well.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
I think
we may be getting close to the rationale of the four methods with what you say
de on a balanced
note -- I agree that I went too far in the direction of stressing our
commonality in my last post. And that your comments here are awelcome
corrective (intended as such or not).
Thanks Bill for another interesting informative and
fun post.
Jim Piat
mean to be cruel. Fact is, I
don't know the detailed facts of any of these
cases. And I digress
--- unaccustomed as I am to public digressions
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Bill Bailey
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Friday, September
re on the beach pretending
the waves will never come.
Again, just some vague notions
-- I can't help but feel that in the case of Peirce his categories
are properly and consistently the foundation of all he
says.
Jim Piat
---
Joe wrote:
"But I would disagree with this
Dear Folks,
Part of what I'm trying to say is that its not as
though the scientific method were an entirely independent alternative to the
other three methods. On the contrary the scientific method is built upon
and incorporates the other three methods. The lst three are not
discredited
tion. Don't have time
just now to clean this up but wanted to put my two cents in the
discussion.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
nly as a way of sorting
words into important (short) and bullshit (long).
Try this:
I b_t y_u c_n r_
_ d e_ _ n t_ _s s_ _ _ _ _ _ e.
OK -- maybe not LOL. Right now
I'm writing a rather too longish response to Joe!
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to sub
what makes or is in a philosopher. Inquiry
maybe.
Best wishes and thanks for keeping us Peirce listers
posted,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Way cool graphic!
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
I know the feeling, Ben. I look forward to
your return. All the best! Let me know if I can be of any practical
help.
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Benjamin Udell
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 4:14
PM
Subject
g the facts and premises to
fit a preconceived conclusion -- on both sides of the political
spectrum.
More later after I've had more time to digest your
post and the comments for Martin and Arnold.
Thanks again,
Jim
Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Title: [peirce-l] Re: "reduction of the manifold to unity"
Dear Folks -- I apologize for
mistakenly including all those prior posts in my last post!
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ng to build the explanation of a
phenomena using building blocks that include the phenomena itself.
Which is why I am so often talking in circles. On a good day.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
Jim,
At first glance, your comment gives me the impression that you are
"psychologizing" se
t I should have focused primarily
on the triadic (standing for to) aspect of the sign and not the dyadic
indexical (referential) aspect. But I'm glad you found my question worth
addressing and I'm looking forward to your comments.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum t
-- aware of our nakedness and so on. The notion that in the
beginning (of awareness) was the word.
Thanks again -- I look forward to any
comments, advice and suggestions you or others might have. I am very
eager to get clear on this point. So drop whatever you are doing ...
Best wishes,
Jim
legitimate, albeit small and sometimes annoying, role in the grand
scheme --I hope. But four posts is enuff of me for now so, with
thanks and best wishes to all, I'll shut up for a while.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
I do not believe that comparing theories by abstracting their general
s
also
think one can neither teach nor learn without love and it's kissin-cousin
enthusiasm.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
om you -- can
you give provide me better question to guide my inquiry into these
exeprts? What is fundamentally at issue here from Peire's standpoint?
Thanks,
Jim Piat
Steven:I
append to this message some quotes from Peirce that might be helpful as
regards cognitive synthes
terpoints of Steven and Gary. That's part of what I find so
appealing and impressive about Peirce -- that he identified both what is
best and what is worst in behaviorism.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ously appreciated and I'm just beginning to grapple with its
implications.
Best wishes,
Jim
On Sep 7, 2006, at 6:48 AM, Jim Piat wrote:
... I just reread this
and your exchange with Patrick, and realize that part of your
concern may be whether on
ious nuances. When I say "we begin by swiming ..." what I mean
is that at some point we awaken biologically and socially to meaning and it is
this awaking that I take as the beginning. Perhaps there is a mode of
being beyond what we call meaning -- but what that could possi
t for some time. It
would be very helpful to me.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
From: Steven Ericsson-Zenith
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 8:34
PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Epistemological
Primacy in Peirce NLC
Dear List,
I want to make sure that I have
en from
within, whcih by an egotistical anacoluthon we call 'our' mind". . .
. "The remark that reasoning consists in the observation of an icon will
be found equally important in th theory and the practice of
reasoning".
None of the above intended as proof of
anything --
d hopefully learning from your challenging arguments! Not sure
you'd agree that I'm learning anything, but I do see a subtle evolution in
your argument in response to the comments of others -- and this I find to
your credit!
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From: "
rush. Still I could not
resist a comment or two of my own.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 2:40 PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Re
as degenerate signs. Maybe this is where I am going astray in my present
analysis of the role of the collateral object in the verification of the
sign.
In anycase I continue to find this discussion helpful. Best wishes to all--
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
s philosophy. Each
time the list revisits this issue in one form or another I gain a
better understanding of what is a stake -- and also of
some erroneous assumptions or conclusions that I have
been making. Thanks to all
--
Jim Piat
Original Message -
From:
Charles Rudder
wrote:
>> That is, there is an immediate--non-mediated and, hence,
cognitively autonomous relation between cognizing subjects and objects
consisting of phenomena and/or things in themselves who are in some sense able
to "see" or "recognize" objects and relations between
comments, Ben,
though I don't have the background (or stamina!) to follow all of
your fourfold analyses. And I will support (to the last
parenthetical remark-) your right to pursue them -- just as you have so
often and patiently indugled my own explorations.
Thanks again and Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
rstanding you as I go. Making sure I understand your
distinction between direct aquaintance and sign mediated aquaintance seems
an important lst step.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
just conclude by saying thanks for your very
ineresting, informative and fun discussion. I look forward to reading more.
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From: "Benjamin Udell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Th
Dear Jerry,
I agree my attempt to explained handedness was faulty. Here is the Peirce
reference to the issue. Glad the conference was such a success.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
"Take any fact in physics of the triadic kind, by which I mean a fact
which can only be defined by simulta
Dear Jerry,
I agree my attempt to explained handedness was faulty. Here is the Peirce
reference to the issue. Glad the conference was such a success.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
"Take any fact in physics of the triadic kind, by which I mean a fact
which can only be defined by simulta
ke. But yes, the example you provided in
that post, illustrated the distinction or emphasis I had in
mind.
Best,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Jim,
I said,
> The only time that one properly splits them without an intervening
word is when one indicates vocal stress of "other" by itself apart from "an"
along with the syllabification "an-other" -- as in "an other
thing."
I guess that that does approximat
quot;otherness" as for
example a self "and" and an other self constitutes otherness. So that
quantitity is implicit in other-others.Likewise time as Peirce oft cited
examplar of Thirdness par excellence carries within it the notion of
sequence or order among others.
Just wondering.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
efies complete description, can certainly prove us
wrong".
Sounds about right to me but I've not read the
book. From an earlier book I'd say Soros was left of center politically
and by his own account heavily influenced by Popper philosophically.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
M
ess only one aspect of life.
Just Wondering,
RESPONSE: Me too, and thanks for the doing so.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
e the term true, for something to be inherently desireable or
beautiful (or anything else) does not require that it "also" be truly
represented as such. But I sometimes use truth in both ways. Plus I'm the
fellow that doesn't know the true from the real so I've got
f degenerate
third or just a plain old garden variety lame excuse.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
nteresting. We humans are
tellers of tales -- it may be our crowning glory.
OK, its a holiday here in the states (and from what some of my British
friends tell me for them as well ;) so I'll sign off for the day and give
all my list friends a break.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from pe
deration of facts be made independent of a consideration of the beautiful
and ethical and some logicians suppose? I'm not convinced. And not
just because folks get upset over such disputes but rather because such attempts
to separate fact and value are inherently false and
upsetting!
C
issue a bit more and addresses your concerns. I think handedness
is a fundamental example of what Peirce meant by a triadic relation so if I've
still got this wrong I hope to be further corrected.
Best
wishes,
Jim
Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
cover of his book!
So that's my conclusion -- or good enough and
the moral thing is for me to shut up and ask for the opinions of others.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Dear Folks,
I've long been sceptical about the notion of good
and evil. So as an exercise of self discipline I thought I'd give a go at
trying to develop a general idea of the notion of good and ask for others to
share some of their views as well.
Seem to me that good is an evaluation we
just for the fun of it -- and admittedly
neither very crisp or concise. But hopefully a little chewy.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
Jerry Chandler wrote:
"My conjecture is that extension is easy in
number/arithmetic,
difficult in chemistry, and very difficult in natural language.
I
l
I
I
C
C
I don't mean to be present the above as
authoritative -- this is merely my understanding of the issue.
Best wishes and good luck witht he
conference,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce
statements, and mere potential states of affairs. I think the
above does it but would welcome errors being pointed out.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
consciousness. I doubt we will find the neurological basis of something
we can't identify in the first place. The effort begs the question.
Moreover neurons may be a necessary without being a sufficient condition for
consciousness.
Just one layman's opinion.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
-
to attempt to sort through how the terms real, existent and true are
related.
Best wishes
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ng is to be avoided because it has led to
so much error; quite in teh same philistine line of thought would that e and so
well in accord with the spriit of nominalism that I wonder some one does not put
it forward. The true precept is not to abstain from hypostatisation, but
to do it intell
Conflict, fear and animosity needs no
encouragment from me. Nor criticism either. I'm just hoping
good will trumps distrust, fear and animosity.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Gary
Richmond
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Monday, Jun
Dear Gary.
Thanks for your generous and kind
words. You inspire me to try to follow your example of courage
and good will.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
PS -- it's a third you damn
blockhead!
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
e it has at times been a bit frustrating but even
more so it has also been extremely helpful. For the record, I
conclude that I was wrong or at best had a very limited understanding
of the issues. Still limited, but better than before.
Thanks to all,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l fo
nt take on this issue I'd
say that, first of all, it all depends on what you mean by First. The sign
it seems is the universal conceptual tool -- if it can be thought, the
sign can accommodate it.
Ah, yes ---and that too!
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
I'll leave that discussion to Jean-Marc et al.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
mited that there are two classes of mental representation,
Immediate Representations or Sensations and Mediate Representations or
Conceptions."
CLOSE QUOTE
The caps are not mine.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
Where does Peirce talk about an "immediate representamen" (or an
"im
resented on page 101 of Justus Buchler's _Philosophical Writings of Peirce_
Best,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
a quality. IOWs a
sinsign is something that stands for a quality that stands for something to
something.
And since this is more or less open forum I'd like to comment on a special
interest of mine and that is the logic of disagreements but I will do that
in a separate post.
Best wishes
the basis of some
supposed logical inconsistancy.
Which is finally to say that I admire both Ben and Jean-Marc and the
discussion they are having (as well as Joe's attempts to keep it from
getting overheated and de-railed).
Best to all,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
more than a corollary".
END PASSAGE.
I believe Bain was a lawyer.
Fisch also suggest that the the pragmatic maxim may have
derived from disussions in the Club.
Best,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ng the whole message, and thanks for the reminder.
Best,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Dear Joe,
In my Websters the meaning of D.C.L. is given as "doctor of civil law", but
I don't find it in Black's Law dictionary.
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From: "Joseph Ransdell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Peirce Discussion Forum" &
ractions. Which, come to think of
it, may actually be Peirce's position.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
Since the demonstration of this proposition is too stiff for the
infantile logic of our time (which is rapidly awakening, however), I have
preferred to state it problematically, as a surmise to
ed. They are
the irreducible, necessary and sufficient modes of all being. There is no
more or less -- nor can there be logically. I'm not the person to
adequately present or defend his position but I think he attempts to do so
himself in his essay On a New List of Categories.
Thanks for your
-- a bit of a first if you will.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
fruitful springs to my mind.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ating previously posted material.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ping into some sort of
reductionist materialism which I don't want to do. I think the space time
continuum which allows for representation is something apart from and beyond
mere materialism. Not that it necessarily requires the notion of
supernatural being but that it does require some
rnd philosphically
about the nature of forms, qualities, substance and the dynamics of
combining them from the chemists and always have. I mean I feel this in my
marrow. One of my all time favorite teachers was a chemist and I can still
remember his lectures about the importance of structure/form. M
Didn't mean to go off in this direction but I
suppose this is my lst attempt at responding to some of your recent critiques of
my discussions of connotation and denotation. Which, as usual I find very
interesting, helpful -- and valid.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
I would _not_ bet that
ften taken in other senses in which this last
proposition is not true.
END QUOTE:
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
- I'll buy the book and add it
to my collections of half read treasures.
Thanks again,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
d that ll life culminates ultimately in a 'supra personal whole'.
END QUOTE
the artical ends with a cross reference to vitalism which reminds me that
Peirce was himself an investigator of spritualism.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
bout doing philosophy, being jewish
and what not.
}The meaning of a word is its use in the language. [Wittgenstein]{
gnusystems }{ Pam Jackson & Gary Fuhrman }{ Manitoulin University
}{ [EMAIL PROTECTED] }{ http://users.vianet.ca/gnox/ }{
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message fr
nform. And I might add I think Peirce
in some ways also anticipated Shannon's measure of information when he
analyzed the fixation of belief in terms of removing doubt or reducing
uncertainty.I look forward to your further exchanges.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
mplified your
position and made it seem more one sided that it is. So I want to
acknowledge that I'm not so much reacting to your balanced comments as I am
to a straw man that I've concocted from a rather one sided and somewhat
tortured reading of your remarks.
Best wishes,
Jim
n any case this has been helpful to me and I would appreciate any
feedback.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
r indicating what is being
indexed or iconized. A lot more. And I look forward to more discussion of
just how "standing for to" or interpretation occurs. I think it needs the
same sort of detailed analysis as the notions of refering which are achieved
through icons and indexes (or their imputed functions reflected in our
communal habits of symbol usage).
As for Jon's earlier insistance that pure symbols did not perform the
functions of icons or indexes (if indeed this was his position), I thought
that he had abstracted and saved the bathwater from the baby rather than
vice versa. As the old starkist add used to remind us, we want tuna that
tastes good; not tuna with good taste.
Thanks for your comments -- I look forward to more.
Best wishes as always, .
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
g a discussion
of topics of mutual interest.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
for all of us -- me for example. A symbol that does not perform the iconic
and denotative function is like a gesture without movement -- sound and
fury signifying nothing. Again, myself a good example.
But most of all -- Thanks for all the interesting observations and
references.
time and
inclination. Thanks again for interesting and helpful comments. I
too, btw, would like further discussion of Robert Marty's work if others are
interested. I tried to follow it on my own a few years ago but was unable
to make much progress and need help.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
categories are themselves relations. I take that to be one of Peirce's main
contributions to the theory of categories.
Sort of . . .
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
great evolutionary advantage over those who do not.
Jim Piat
Gray Richmond wrote:
Auke,Thank you for your interesting comments and for the
quite pertinent Peirce quotation reminding us "that the essential function of
a sign is to render inefficient relations effi
anycase I don't mean to be coming across as nit picking or at odds with
your view. Mostly just trying to sort out some terminological issues in my
own mind and very much enjoying your insights. Found the Barr book, btw,
and will get on that later.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Mess
I was meditating that actually the most mechanical emotions
may be thought as material relationships via neuronal paths starting
from external stimulations up to conscious appraisal. Thus, your
defintion of index is applicable to emotions, or at least to the
emotions poorer of cognitive content.
abstract from it the
felt residue.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
again for your comments. I am naturally comforted by and drawn to
your psychological approach. As I suspect is the case with most folks,
ultimately I have to ground the meaning of things in my own experiences. So
I hope you continue to present your perspective.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
Dear Jim,
I t
an's history as man.
I guess what I'm saying is that names are symbols not indexes. As for what
specificically is meant by subindex I'm not sure. Just couldn't resist
jumping in -- as I am trying to follow this interesting discussion through
its backs and forths
ope you keep us posted.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
