Jon, would you have an opinion on which of Peirce's 10 classes of
signs the following statement would be classified under? (01)
RC> "The first cold weather is a sign of the coming Fall and Winter in
the Northern Hemisphere." (02)
Most likely an index and dicisign? (03)
On 8/24/2010 7:07 AM, Jon Awbrey wrote:
> Re: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2010-08/msg00210.html
> Rich Cooper wrote:
> > Thanks for Peircifying the discussion so I (for one)
> > can start to figure out what Peirce is good for.
> > The triad we discussed earlier was
> > <sign, interpretANT, interpretER>.
> > The different triad you are presenting here is
> > <object,sign,interpretANT> with a fallen InterpretER.
> > How are these two triads related? Clearly the only way
> > to take the InterpretER out of the issue is to make
> > the difficult to justify claim of objectivity --
> > "everyone perceives it this way".
> > Please explain the use of Everyone
> > as the observer, actor InterpretER.
> It is possible to formalize the relation between
> interpreter-talk and interpretant-talk -- I made
> one start at doing this here:
> But I still think Peirce's homme-ble homme-ily about the
> French Interpreter's ''Homme'' is sufficient to the task:
> The whole point using a 3-adic sign relation -- as distinguished
> from the 2-adic sign relations of Descartes, Saussure, and others --
> is to put the interpreter back into the process of interpretation.
> As I have emphasized e-numerable times, the interpreter is in some
> sense the whole of the relevant sign relation that we find involved
> in a particular pattern of semiosis, for instance, a communication,
> computation, inference, or inquiry.
> Another way to view the relationship between the interpreter and the
> sign relation is from the perspective of mathematical systems theory.
> There we have a "system" moving through the states of its state space,
> like one of those pinging blue GPS dots moving through the manifold of
> some earthly domain's map or satellite view. It is really nothing more
> than a rhetorical turn of phrase to call that "representative point" by
> by its office or title of "agent". The properties of interest are all
> systematic dynamic properties, but agent-talk gives us convenient ways
> of phrasing questions and answers. Technically speaking, we can call
> the agent a "hypostatic abstraction" from the dynamics of the system.
> Jon Awbrey
> CC: Arisbe, Inquiry
> inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
> mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
> knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1
> oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (06)