Mike, Jon, John, Rich, (01)
thanks for the comments. However, I received different comments at the
Helsinki metaphysical club meeting. I tried to fit together
D.M.Armstrong's scheme of universals with Peirce's 123, as described
below, and I got comments that this can be said to be in cope with
Peirce. (02)
In Armstrong's ontology, a particular instantiation of a law of nature
is a second-order universal, a necessitating relation between
first-order universals. In this scheme, the masses of A and B are 1st
order universals, and the force between A and B a 2nd order universal. (03)
When this is forced together with 123, one way to do this is that
masses of A and B are firstnesses and the force between them a
secondness. But I have not found any direct citations from Peirce that
would support this interpretation. At least not from vol. 6 of the
collected works. So, do you have any suggestions of where I could find
those? (04)
Also, I have looked for a citation where Peirce says that firstnesses
are only seeming, and that every firstness is a secondness from
another aspect (any suggestions of citations?). With the masses of
planets A and B, this can be explained so that the mass of A is also
secondness relative to another (lower) level: the mass of A is the sum
of all parts of A, and thus a relation of all proper parts of A. (05)
In any case, the idea that firstnesses are independent qualities and
secondness is a reaction between them, is so general that it can be
applied also in the abovementioned way. Or would it be totally wrong
to say that it is an application of 123? (06)
Avril (07)
Lainaus "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: (08)
> Avril,
>
> I don't think gravity is an example of the kind of thirdness that Peirce
> indicated because gravity doesn't get a sign and make an interpretant
> associate with it. This is just a gravitational function of two variables,
> g(A,B) where A and B are the two objects gravitating.
>
> But even functions with three parameters aren't necessarily the
> implementation of that thirdness concept which requires an interpreter.
>
> JMHO,
> -Rich
>
> Sincerely,
> Rich Cooper
> EnglishLogicKernel.com
> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avril Styrman
> Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 12:40 PM
> To: [ontolog-forum] ; Rick Murphy
> Cc: [ontolog-forum]
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Triangles and Meanings
>
> Dear all,
>
> now that you talk again about triads, I want to ask that does anybody
> have objections to the following use of Peirce's triads.
>
> -Masses of planets A and B are both individual firstnesses.
>
> -The gravitational force that acts between between A and B is an
> individual secondness.
>
> -The law of gravitation is thirdness. Thirdness can be called
> universal, because it can be found everywhere, at least on the scale
> of compact stellar objects.
>
>
> I think that this is a good example of how Peirce's triads can be
> applied. Any objections?
>
> Avril
>
>
>
>
> Lainaus "Rick Murphy" <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 19:32 -0500, Christopher Menzel wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 19:56 -0400, Jon Awbrey wrote:
>>> > Rick,
>>> >
>>> > ...a lot of confusion can be avoided if we keep this distinction and
>>> > associated facts in mind.
>>>
>>> As the kids say (and as seems especially appropriate): Word! Would that
>>> your sage advice were actually to be heeded in this forum.
>>
>> Apparently, when our science fails, all we have left is just words.
>>
>>> Chris Menzel
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Rick
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Always forward towards the supreme maxim of scientific philosophizing
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/
> 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
>
>
> (09)
--
Always forward towards the supreme maxim of scientific philosophizing (010)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (011)
|