You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Peirce’ tag.

You might think, Oh no, she’s still at it!

You’d be right. I can’t seem to get out all that seems to be in it and around it. IT being the “Rule”–or, if mental-affective flows are [become, at some point in time] the proper subject of physics/natural science–the “Law” (of Reciprocity).

I was thinking about formalizing it as a Law of Humanity, so experimented with some logical notation:

do (x) = would-want (x, S) | S = be-done-to (x, y)

where x = I, you, s/he… they
S = sentence, proposition, subordinate clause this this case
y = anyone/anything other than x

So a COROLLARY (in a more general sense rather than in the strict sense of math/Peircean logic) to the Golden Rhyming Rule popped up:

As I/you…they

do

so will I/you…they

be done

to

Thus,

do (x) = will-be (x, S) | S = be-done-to (x, y)

Doesn’t it look like intending/acting, analogous to what physics tells us about the indestructibility/changeability of Energy, may in fact be undergoing transformations, but not disappearing?

do (x, y) = be done to (x, y-or-z) 

or

do (x, y) <=> be done to (x, y-or-z)

In the colloquial idiom, “What goes around, comes around”.

I’M THINKING IT JUST MIGHT BE WORTHWHILE TO CONTINUE EXPERIMENTING WITH DERIVING A HUMAN(E) *LAW* OF A SIGNIFICANCE COMMENSURATE WITH THAT OF E=mc^2

What if one of E or m corresponds to “doing” and the other “being done to” – in the sense of an organism interacting with its environment – per e.g. Gregory Bateson’s proposed unit of evolutionary survival = organism + environment, or per  John Dewey (1916) before him?

…to which I owe the links for Peirce’s terms synechism (conceptualization of {absolute} chance) and tychism (conceptualization of {universal} continuity) in my previous post. Peirce alternated the latter concept with agapism (cosmic love).

What’s really rewarding for the web-browsing eye/mind is that some of the papers presented at Club meetings/conferences are accessible through their website here. They have been able to attract “names” in semiotics/related fields of exploration.

As to the online dictionary of Peircean terms, I’d consider it a special strength that it comprises original Peirce quotes to illustrate each entry. Kudos to its editors, Mats Bergman & Sami Paavola and its contributors:

The COMMENS Dictionary of Peirce’s Terms. Peirce’s Terminology in His Own Words (If u want to contribute quotes: use the form)

Starting with the term “commens” itself as an especially apt name for the website:

“…that mind into which the minds of utterer and interpreter have to be fused in order that any communication should take place … may be called the commens. It consists of all that is, and must be, well understood between utterer and interpreter, at the outset, in order that the sign in question should fulfill its function.” (Charles S. Peirce, 1906, emphases by Ecosonance)

Calendar

December 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Categories

© CreativeCommonsLicense

Creative Commons License Img

accurate quoting proper attribution by/on ES & of ES