The comment from WP on this one:

If the writing is honest it cannot be separated from the [hu]man who wrote it. — Tennessee Williams

In view of Peirce’s logico-semiotic “principle of pragmatism,” I would not worry about what “words” are used for any notion in the formulated Thesis, as long as some operational equivalence obtains between their respective “effects/uses.” Ergo, there can be ECOSONIC

                        1. philosophizing

                        2. being

                        3. acting

in ANY Language, moreover in the broad sense of the term “language”.

The question is, in what medium/manner should the FN be “uttered”/“interpreted.” So that it can be heard/acted on, not only theorized/uttered. My interest, communication, hinges on the degree of meaning overlap of semiosis from the perspective of 1) utterer, and 2) interpreter. The necessity of both of these terms motivates my tetradic (and counting) version of Peirce’s triadic sign.

A. Classic Peircean triadic sign:

                    interpretant
               /
sign                 |
               \
                    object

B. Proposed COMMUNICATIVE sign:

I. At a minimum, a tetrad, as the interval between Sense and Interpretant is the locus of communication.

                        sense [meaning intended]

sign                                                interpretant [meaning interpreted]

                        object

II. Or else, depending on the zoom level of analysis, a pentad and counting. Starting with the creation/coining of a term, i.e. the “depth” term of pentad:

                        Depth [wordsmith]

                                                Sense [utterer]

Sign                                                Interpretant [interpreter]

                        Object

Meaning “Splicing” = Meaning division into pairs or triples of Depth, Sense, and Interpretant

Meaning Derivation = rarely straight-lined or regularly sequenced Meaning Splicing, in varied order, in organic coordination with Object of the sign and Sign.

Connecting “lines” are not represented, but each and every term is seen as connected to all the others, in varying manner, which gives none of them a determining position. E.g. as in the Springer version below, which however has the disadvantage of positing a nameless crossing point, and resorting to straight lines:

THESIS, IN FULL, to make math-philosopher Edmund Landau ” “
January 27, 2012 update

Should you brave the ecosonance experimental proof, feedback on how it increased your well-being is very welcome. No effort-back guarantees!

Edmund Landau’s 12 pg thesis, defended in Berlin, 1899.

Synchronistically [one has to wonder ],  yet another apt auto-comment by WP:

Easy reading is damn hard writing. — Nathaniel Hawthorne

He responded, YES!!! So more coming up.

Update: Jan 25, 2012

Happy to introduce a rich life through a website’s photographic eye: pix 1-3 below from site, #4 is my screen shot. CLICK on image to go there.

http://biology.clc.uc.edu/fankhauser/

reflex arc page:

orchids:

some lived American history–1960s:

How’s this for a teaching record–complete with photos!!!:

My exchanges with Prof Fankhauser, to my greatest delight ecosonic, if I may make the claim.

Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 04:32:17 -0500
From: lynne.alexandrova
Reply-To: lynne.alexandrova
Subject: Re: Use of my web material on your blog on the reflex arc
To: Fankhauser, David
Cc: [cc-ed person's name & email edited out]

Dear Prof Fankhauser,

If I may, “Joy to the world!” to your reply. By “find” I meant your
life, as reflected by your site. Since all I do, think,… breathe, if
you like, is potentially research, I am posting this exchange–as an
illustration of ecosonic communication–editing out anything (except
David B. Fankhauser, PhD) in the way of “personal info,” even what can
be found by following the link to your site–if a visitor to ES
opts to make the effort.

The part below I can edit back in, with your permission:
[giving here sig file info]

I’ll be in touch–
Lynne Alexandrova

Quoting “Fankhauser, David (fankhadb)” <fankhadb@ucmail.uc.edu>:

> Dear Lynne Alexandrova:
>
> I am happy to have my work used for educational purposes, with
> appropriate citation of my page(s) from which the material was
> derived.
>
> Thank you for your warm communication, and asking for permission to
>  use my material.  You were ecstatic?!  You made my day!    If I
>  get a degree of this reaction from my students, I think I have more
>  that done my job!
>
> Could you let me know when you have made use of the material, and
> provide the URL to your blog?  I am eager to see how you use it.
>
> David B. Fankhauser, PhD
[signature file edited out]
>
> ________________________________________
> From: lynne.alexandrova@***
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 7:41 PM
> To: Fankhauser, David
> Subject: invitation for virtual presence
>
> Dear Prof Fankhauser,
>
> I recently came across your website while doing research on the reflex
> arc in psychology http://biology.clc.uc.edu/fankhauser/, and was
> ecstatic about the find.
>
> If at all possible, I’d like to invite your virtual visit to my blog
> in the form of posting a few of your images, with credits to you(r
> website).
> http://ecosonance.wordpress.com/
>
> THANK you for sharing your life–rewarding to take a glimpse of it,
> even for the chance visitor!
>
> I do look forward to your reply–certainly at your convenience.
>
> Kind regards–
> Lynne Alexandrova
> _____________________
> doctoral student
> University of Toronto
> T.O. M5S 1V6

As you can imagine, I am doing the ecosonance tune-up routine, developed in my doctoral thesis of January 27, 2012 . That aside, the principles on which the credit machine operates poses a lot of ethical-philosophical questions, for financiers and for us customers.

Case Study I

Today, Zellers restored the strore MC that had been cancelled.

That happened basically because I had not been using it “enough.” [undefinable quantity] A while back, when I made a purchase at a high price relative to income, and Zellers had a promo through the MC, I decided to put the purchase on the card. I could not. The card had not been extended after a date by which I had had to call them, confirm, or something. As I talked to progressively more senior supervisors, I finally heard that “yes, I see this-and-that, I see you made purchase, but you paid off right away (!!!)”

Case Study II

A couple of years ago my regular master card lost credit limit. I had neglected to pay the annual fee of $20.00 for 90 days+ (!), so my limit was brought down to a hundred and fifty dollars. [shock!!!] It did not matter that I had had a good balance pay-off record. It did not matter that the amount was only $20.00. It did not matter that that was an “annual fee,” and since I had not made a purchase, I would not have been expecting to have to clear balance at all. It did not matter that some credit card accounts waive annual fees altogether. What mattered, an instructive, short-tempered voice at the other end said, was BEHAVIOR.

I was careful not to use the card for perhaps over a year. When I called to have my limit restored, for “good behavior,” you understand, I was told that I had no proof I am a …[disciplined???]… customer. I had not made ANY purchases. I had no record to judge buy [kinda like this typo, so leaving it as is] if I am “reliable” or not.

I understood I have to make purchases and pay them off within deadlines for awhile, to earn “reliability points.” It was not clear how long and how many points. Of course, the credit bureaux still had a black point for me.

Development to Case Suty II

Now that I got back my store card, I decided to call the National Bank again. I asked to speak to the most senior person I cold possibly speak to, related the “case” yet again. It was acknowledged that I had made purchases and paid off on time. However, since I called at a time when a supervisor was not available, I was asked about a “convenient time to call.”

For the record, I stated that I have “philosophical, if you like” objections:
1. If I had been apprised about the rule of credit record creation, instead of NOT using the card I would have used it.
2. I can accept suspension based on tardiness.
3. However, irrespective of whether the rules of the bank consider “behavior” and not literal amount, for a regular person the amount of $20.00 IS minimal. AND, annual fees are “waive-able” (one might guess, if there is good behavior on record, and similar)
4. I have been a customer for about 15 years. Went at some point in the past through a rough student period* but cleared that up. (Learned about the “7 years” rule.) I cannot accept that I would be “punished” for the “wrong” kind of good behaviour. If there is penalty for a rule you were not apprised of, so that you can observe it, that has the taste of UNFAIR. For the regular person, and common sense.
5. This is a principled issue, since there would be others in the position of guilty-and-punished-without-being-given-any-notice. Imagine someone very young, who does not know ANY of the “rules” above, and thus totally defenceless. They may not even be able to phrase what it is that feels SO unfair.

Should it be the (credit card) case that the more one needs money, the more one needs to pay?! Of which system the banks are ONLY a link, not THE system.

So, awaiting conversation with supervisor. If they cannot “resolve,” the next step is “mediation,” I was told. Will there come a time for SYNTHESIS after the multiple rounds of THESIS and ANTITHESIS?

* That was when—being “overqualified” with 2 MAs AND guilty of “pursuing a PhD”—I could not find an entry-level job, and was practically ineligible for jobs “with qualifications” in the absence of an “employment record.” [that word AGAIN] The local bakery had a job sign for over a year, got from me several resumes. Never called back. Resorted to evasive tactics when I was asking to speak to the manager/owner, and explaining to a potential colleague how I love decorating cakes. I DO, actually.

WP’s comment on this one:

My ideas usually come not at my desk writing but in the midst of living. — Anais Nin

ES: but of course

Lyrics/video grâce à YouTube, vocals by Andrea Bocelli & Hayley Westenra, body art by Jamie Salé and David Pelletier

THE HEART FROM … ALL-OF-US?

{English translation, with astute linguistic commentary by TheNewCitizen}

Vivo per lei da quando sai
La prima volta l’ho incontrata,
Non mi ricordo come ma
Mi è entrata dentro e c’è restata.
Vivo per lei perché mi fa
Vibrare forte l’anima,
Vivo per lei e non è un peso.

Vivo per lei anch’io lo sai
E tu non esserne geloso,
Lei è di tutti quelli che
Hanno un bisogno sempre acceso,
Come uno stereo in camera,
Di chi è da solo e adesso sa,
Che è anche per lui, per questo
Io vivo per lei.
è una musa che ci invita
A sfiorarla con le dita,
Atraverso un pianoforte
La morte è lontana,
Io vivo per lei.
Vivo per lei che spesso sa
Essere dolce e sensuale,
A volte picchia in testa una
è un pugno che non fa mai male.
Vivo per lei lo so mi fa
Girare di città in città,
Soffrire un po’ ma almeno io vivo.

è un dolore quando parte.
Vivo per lei dentro gli hotels.
Con piacere estremo cresce.
Vivo per lei nel vortice.
Attraverso la mia voce
Si espande e amore produce.

Vivo per lei nient’altro ho
E quanti altri incontrero
Che come me hanno scritto in viso:
Io vivo per lei.

Io vivo per lei
Sopra un palco o contro ad un muro…
Vivo per lei al limite.
… anche in un domani duro.
Vivo per lei al margine.
Ogni giorno
Una conquista,
La protagonista
Sarà sempre lei.
Vivo per lei perché oramai
Io non ho altra via d’uscita,
Perché la musica lo sai
Davvero non l’ho mai tradita.
Vivo per lei perché mi da
Pause e note in libertà
Ci fosse un’altra vita la vivo,
La vivo per lei.
Vivo per lei la musica.
Io vivo per lei.
Vivo per lei è unica.
Io vivo per lei.
Io vivo per lei.
Io vivo
Per lei.

Credit: YouTube Upload by billy1983yes on May 25, 2006

YouTube applauds with Anne Rice’s:

I loved words. I love to sing them and speak them and even now, I must admit, I have fallen into the joy of writing them.

dancing them, feeling them… you fill in the blanks

Below is what Charles Sanders Peirce wrote shortly after William James died in 1910. James, 3 years his junior, whom Peirce survived by 4 years, was the one who gave him more support than anyone else (Josiah Royce being in the picture, though much less robustly), including generously giving him full credit for the founding of pragmatism, as well as literally making the movement count, in a big way, by the turn of the twentieth century.

His comprehension of men to the very core was most wonderful. Who, for example, could be of a nature so different from his than I? He so concrete, so living; I a mere table of contents, so abstract, a very snarl of twine. Yet in all my life I found scarce any soul that seemed to comprehend, naturally, [not] my concepts, but the mainspring of my life better than he did. He was even greater [in the] practice than in the theory of psychology. [6.184] (cited after Burks 1996, p. 341, edits in source)

I am citing the above after Arthur Burks, who is one of three editors of the impressive 8-volume Collected Papers of Peirce. The notation [6.184] refers to volume number and paragraph (I think), which can be looked up in volume 8 containing the bibliography.

Taking this opportunity to quote a self-reflective Peirce, who by the way, shared James’s belief that psychic phenomena can provide (the hallowed) empirical evidence of the reality of the Divine/a deity:

I say to people–imaginary interlocutors, for I have nobody to talk to,–you think that the proposition that truth and justice are the greatest powers in the world, is metaphorical. Well, I, for my part, hold it to be true. No doubt Truth has to have defenders to uphold it. But truth creates its defenders and gives them strength. The mode in which the idea of truth influences the world is esentially the same as that in which my desire to have the fire poked causes me to get up and poke it. There is efficient causation and there is final, or ideal, causation. If either of them is to be set down as a metaphor, it is rather the former. [8.272] (from a letter to James, cited after Burks 1996, p. 346, italics in source)

I say to people–imaginary interlocutors, for I have nobody to talk to–is the part that really GOT me. Especially in view of the context. James, a highly regarded academic at Harvard, Peirce–for all the credit James, Royce, a.o., gave his genius–never held an academic position after the relatively brief contract at John Hopkins. Most of what he wrote failed to attract the favor of publishers, until the resurgence of interest in pragmatism toward the end of the twentieth century. Both Peirce and James had to handle serious ailments for the duration of their lives. Peirce trigeminal neuralgia since his late teens, an extremely painful condition caused by a facial nerve, which pushed him to counteract it with tobacco, alcohol, morphine… James was fighting neurasthenia. In the case of Peirce, personal suffering combined with “a very snarl of twine” of a personality (per quote at top), in James’s case, apparently, with understanding and compassion.

Yet, judging by their respective writings, Peirce was James’s equal in his understanding of how interdependent humans are on one another, even if from his more of a logical-cosmic perspective. Regarding the (epistemological human-cosmos) realm that he cared about the most, he multiply stressed that Truth/Reality cannot possibly be achieved by an individual, but can only be the outcome of an enterprise of an “infinite community” of human knowers. Likely of scientifically minded, inquiry-motivated ones, given Peirce’s penchant for the discipline and beauty of logic and the natural sciences.

to be continued…

WP’s last 2 acknowledgements:
Writing, to me, is simply thinking through my fingers.
— Isaac Asimov
That isn’t writing at all, it’s typing. [it was copy-paste-deleting, actually, i.e, current post re-posted with edits; LOL at the thematically attuned random choice]
— Truman Capote

William James brought heart to the intellect and passion to the world of ideas in an unprecedented manner in American life. He is the most profound, adorable, and unpretentious public intellectual in American history.
–Cornel West, Princeton University (20100701)

[credits: amazon.ca/.com book reviews for The Heart of William James (2010), put together by biographer Robert D. Richardson on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of his death]

• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on William James (Jan 11, 1842 – Aug 26, 1910)
• Other online encyclopedias
• Below a lecture on James’s The Varieties of Religious Experience, The Will to Believe and related, by contemporary pragmatist philosopher Prof. Richard Rorty (1931-2007), by all accounts dearly missed by those who knew him.

YouTube credit: Parts 1-4 uploaded byneopragvideoon Oct 7, 2008

Part 2|Part 3|Part 4

• Audio of Chapter Twenty-nine from Book Three, Part Two of Bertrand Russell’s “The History of Western Philosophy” (1945): Part 1 here, and Part 2 below:

YouTube credit: Parts 1&2 uploaded by workingklass0on May 12, 2011

Just YT-search William James + philosophy, psychology, pragmatism for some good YouTube vid’s.

 
This creative hands-on workshop allows participants to use their bodily feelings and visual imaginations to make sense… of histories of wars and genocides in which one may be implicated as descendants of the victims and/or aggressors. Interactive sessions with Diana also reveals how actors, the director and herself approached Nanjing Massacre as the lived history of actual people and have made it their own stories through the creation of Red Snow.

Flexible and fun in format, each activity touches upon questions asked in the contemporary practices of remembrance and reconciliation, exploring ways to narrate, express and recollect wars and genocides without reproducing us-and-them divides while acknowledging marginalized voices.

Free Admission.
Seating is limited. Please inform your attendance in advance to: chikako.nagayama@utoronto.ca
OISE is located near TTC St. George Station, between Bedford St. and St. George St. on Bloor Street.

Other posts in the same spirit:

• ES’s first people for good.ca post
• on the “golden rule”
• the average is amazing
• I c u, u c me–with a bite

1. THANKU

• WP, for the tidbits of wisdom below–ever since post #90
  
• AND, All You Visitors, who chance to read
• AND EVEN respond
  

The art of writing is the art of discovering what you believe.
Gustave Flaubert

I loved words. I love to sing them and speak them and even now, I must admit, I have fallen into the joy of writing them.
Anne Rice

My ideas usually come not at my desk writing but in the midst of living. 
Anais Nin

Dreams are illustrations from the book your soul is writing about you.
Marsha Norman

I’m writing a book. I’ve got the page numbers done.
Steven Wright

The desire to write grows with writing.
Desiderius Erasmus

Easy reading is damn hard writing.
Nathaniel Hawthorne

2. a fav video of mine for quite a while now, my best guess for the reason is, the champagne combination of Hugs Affect plus the Leonard Cohen tune: Click the Masaru Emoto crystal image to watch & listen: