DOCSLIB.ORG

A Philosophical Commentary on Cs Peirce's “On a New List

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Philosophical Commentary on Cs Peirce's “On a New List The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the Liberal Arts A PHILOSOPHICAL COMMENTARY ON C. S. PEIRCE'S \ON A NEW LIST OF CATEGORIES": EXHIBITING LOGICAL STRUCTURE AND ABIDING RELEVANCE A Dissertation in Philosophy by Masato Ishida °c 2009 Masato Ishida Submitted in Partial Ful¯lment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2009 The dissertation of Masato Ishida was reviewed and approved¤ by the following: Vincent M. Colapietro Professor of Philosophy Dissertation Advisor Chair of Committee Dennis Schmidt Professor of Philosophy Christopher P. Long Associate Professor of Philosophy Director of Graduate Studies for the Department of Philosophy Stephen G. Simpson Professor of Mathematics ¤ Signatures are on ¯le in the Graduate School. ii ABSTRACT This dissertation focuses on C. S. Peirce's relatively early paper \On a New List of Categories"(1867). The entire dissertation is devoted to an extensive and in-depth analysis of this single paper in the form of commentary. All ¯fteen sections of the New List are examined. Rather than considering the textual genesis of the New List, or situating the work narrowly in the early philosophy of Peirce, as previous scholarship has done, this work pursues the genuine philosophical content of the New List, while paying attention to the later philosophy of Peirce as well. Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is also taken into serious account, to which Peirce contrasted his new theory of categories. iii Table of Contents List of Figures . ix Acknowledgements . xi General Introduction 1 The Subject of the Dissertation . 1 Features of the Dissertation . 1 Interpretive Orientation . 2 The Structure of the Dissertation . 4 I Analysis of the Framework 6 1 New List x1-x4 7 1.1 Introduction . 7 1.1.1 The \Gift I Make to the World" . 7 1.1.2 The Structure of the New List ................... 8 1.2 The Standpoint and Task of the New List . 10 1.2.1 The Standpoint of the New List(x1) . 10 1.2.2 The Task of the New List (x2) . 11 1.3 Substance: The Last Conception (x3) . 13 1.3.1 Two Directions of Analysis . 13 1.3.2 The Present in General . 13 1.3.3 Substance and Phenomenalism . 14 1.4 Being: The First Conception (x4) . 16 1.4.1 Being as Copula: No Content . 16 1.4.2 Being and Substance: The Genetic and Logical Standpoints . 17 1.4.3 Example: \The Stove is Black." . 18 1.4.3.1 Peirce's Text . 18 1.4.3.2 Uni¯cation, Di®erentiation, and Reuni¯cation . 19 1.4.3.3 `Analysis' of the Synthetic Process . 20 2 New List x5 and x6 21 2.1 The Method of Derivation: Prescision (x5) . 21 2.1.1 Overview of the Idea . 21 iv 2.1.2 De¯nition of Prescision . 22 2.1.2.1 Peirce's Text . 22 2.1.2.2 Our De¯nition . 23 2.1.3 Three Modes of Separation . 24 2.1.4 Examples of Prescision . 26 2.1.5 Further Details of Non-reciprocity . 28 2.1.5.1 The Next Concern . 28 2.1.5.2 Argument for (1) . 28 2.1.5.3 Argument for (2) . 29 2.1.5.4 A Summary Remark on Non-reciprocity . 30 2.2 The Unpsychological View of Logic (x6) . 30 2.2.1 Prescision and Introspection . 30 2.2.2 Peirce and Kant on Logic . 32 2.2.3 Genetic Model and Logical Analysis . 33 II The Derivation of Categories 36 3 New List x7-x8 37 3.1 Quality: Reference to a Ground (x7) . 37 3.1.1 Quality in the Widest Sense . 37 3.1.2 The Subject-Predicate Asymmetry . 38 3.1.3 Quality and Ground . 39 3.1.3.1 Ground as Pure Abstraction . 39 3.1.3.2 Some Contexts for the Notion of Ground . 40 3.1.3.3 The Need for Ground (1): Genetic Viewpoint . 41 3.1.3.4 The Need for Ground (2): Logical Viewpoint . 44 3.1.4 Hypothetical Application of the Predicate . 44 3.1.5 `Embodying Blackness' and `Black' . 45 3.1.6 Functionalism and Pragmatism in the New List . 46 3.1.7 Passing from Being to Quality . 47 3.1.8 Challenging Kantian Assumptions . 48 3.2 Relation: Reference to a Correlate (x8) . 49 3.2.1 Overview: Correlate in the New List . 49 3.2.1.1 The Basic Idea . 49 3.2.1.2 Kantian Analogue . 49 3.2.1.3 Peirce's Later Remark (1908) . 50 3.2.2 Peirce's Text of x8.......................... 51 3.2.3 Further Details of Correlate . 51 3.2.3.1 Similarity and Agreement . 51 3.2.3.2 The Subtlety of Correlate . 52 3.2.3.3 Stream of Correlates . 53 3.2.3.4 Comparison and Contrast . 54 v 3.2.4 Important Implication . 55 3.2.5 The Problem of Secondness . 57 3.2.6 From Quality to Relation . 58 4 New List x9-x13 60 4.1 Representation: Reference to an Interpretant (x9) . 60 4.1.1 Example 1: Comparison of `p' and `b' . 60 4.1.2 Example 2: Murderer and the Murdered . 61 4.1.3 Example 3: `Homme' and `Man' . 62 4.1.4 Generalization to `Representation' . 62 4.1.5 The Last Two Paragraphs of x9................... 63 4.2 Characterizing Representation Further (x10) . 64 4.3 The New List of Categories (x11) . 65 4.3.1 Summary of Argument . 65 4.3.2 The Elusiveness of the Categories . 66 4.3.3 The List Presented . 67 4.4 On the Order of Categories (x12) . 67 4.5 Possible Ontology (x13) . 69 III New List and Semeiotics 71 5 The Theory of Signs 72 5.1 Basic Characterization of Sign . 72 5.1.1 Sign as Part of the Relate: De¯nition 1 (1904) . 72 5.1.2 De¯nition 1 in Light of the New List . 73 5.1.3 Signs and Physical Objects . 74 5.2 The Working of Sign . 74 5.2.1 Sign at Work: De¯nition 2 (1911) . 74 5.2.2 De¯nition 2 in Light of the New List . 75 5.3 Sign in the Triadic Relation . 76 5.3.1 Sign as `a First': De¯nition 3 (1903) . 76 5.3.2 Sign as the `First Correlate': De¯nition 4 . 76 5.3.3 De¯nition 3 and 4 in Light of the New List . 77 5.4 The Object of Sign . 80 5.4.1 Originals of the Sign: De¯nition 5 (c.1907-1911) . 80 5.4.2 De¯nition 5 in Light of the New List . 81 5.5 The Plurality of Objects and the Logic of Relatives . 81 5.5.1 Relational Predicates . 81 5.5.2 Relations and the Object-Complex . 82 vi 6 New List x14 84 6.1 A Problem: Sign and Causation . 84 6.2 Di®erentiating Index from Icon . 85 6.2.1 Peirce's Text . 86 6.2.2 The Idea of the Argument . 87 6.2.3 The Concept of Index . 88 6.2.4 The Concept of Icon . 88 6.2.5 Peirce's Explanation of Icon and Index . 89 6.2.6 Prescision De¯nes Icon and Index . 90 6.2.7 Causal and Non-causal Relations . 90 6.3 The Derivation of Symbol . 91 6.3.1 Peirce's Text . 91 6.3.2 The Idea of the Argument . 92 6.3.3 The Nature of Symbol . 93 6.3.3.1 Symbol and the Prescision Relation . 93 6.3.3.2 Intuitive Illustration of Symbol . 94 6.4 Further Characterizations of Icon, Index, and Symbol . 96 6.4.1 Characterization of Icon . 96 6.4.2 Characterization of Index . 98 6.4.3 Characterization of Symbol . 101 6.4.3.1 Theoretical Consideration and De¯nition . 101 6.4.3.2 Case Studies . 102 6.4.3.3 Summary Remark on Symbol . 105 6.5 Semeiotic Parasites, Medium, and Causation . 106 6.5.1 Signs as Parasites . 106 6.5.2 Sign as Medium . 107 6.5.3 Three Modes of Mediation . 108 6.5.4 Semeiotic Causation . 110 6.5.5 A Small Application of the Idea . 111 IV New List and the Logic of Representations 113 7 The Theory of Representations 114 7.1 Sign, Object, and Appearance . 114 7.2 `First Impressions' in the Late Peirce . 115 7.3 Sign and Representamen . 117 7.4 Peirce's `Errors' in the New List . 120 7.4.1 Textual Issues.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Trichotomy of Processes: a Philosophical Basis for Information Systems
    Association for Information Systems AIS Electronic Library (AISeL) Americas Conference on Information Systems AMCIS 2003 Proceedings (AMCIS) December 2003 The rT ichotomy of Processes: A Philosophical Basis for Information Systems George Widmeyer University of Michigan Follow this and additional works at: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2003 Recommended Citation Widmeyer, George, "The rT ichotomy of Processes: A Philosophical Basis for Information Systems" (2003). AMCIS 2003 Proceedings. 362. http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2003/362 This material is brought to you by the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS) at AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). It has been accepted for inclusion in AMCIS 2003 Proceedings by an authorized administrator of AIS Electronic Library (AISeL). For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE TRICHOTOMY OF PROCESSES: A PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS FOR INFORMATION SYSTEMS George R. Widmeyer University of Michigan [email protected] Abstract The principle of trichotomy from the American philosopher Charles S. Peirce can be used to categorize processes into the triad of transactional, informational, and relational. The usefulness of these categories is explicated by a comparison with structuration theory and control theory, and elaborated with a consideration of democracy in a knowledge economy. These three example applications of the process triad show the generality of the conceptual categories and provide a natural way of bringing ideas from social and ethical theories into information systems design. Modeling the world and understanding business applications through the use of the Trichotomy of Processes should facilitate the development of more valuable information systems. Keywords: Business processes, information systems theory, conceptual modeling, ontology, Peirce, open society Introduction Various frameworks for understanding the business processes of an organization have been proposed.
    [Show full text]
  • And Peirce's Synechism
    Elective Metaphysical Affi nities: Emerson’s “Natural History of Intellect” and Peirce’s Synechism Afi nidades Eletivas Metafísicas: A “História Natural do Intelecto” de Emerson e o Sinequismo de Peirce David A. Dilworth Philosophy Department State University of New York at Stony Brook – USA [email protected] Abstract: The paper suggests that Peirce’s late-phase metaphysical system af- termathed Emerson’s basic philosophical ideas elaborated over four decades before him. Peirce, with characteristic brilliance, transformed Emerson’s own luminous ideas into his categorial elaborations of abduction, cosmogonic synechism, universal semiosis, and the like. To illustrate this process of transformation, the paper provides a running synopsis of Emerson’s last signifi cant writing, “The Natural History of Intellect” (1870), which was ori- ginally part of a team-taught lecture series at Harvard that Emerson shared with six others, one of whom was the young C. S. Peirce. The synopsis evidences that virtually all of Peirce’s major metaphysical tenets had their precedent in Emerson. Among other places, Peirce acknowledged Emerson’s infl uence (together with that of Schelling) in his 1892 essay, “The Law of Mind.” Even before that, he referenced Emerson’s poem “The Sphinx” in his “A Guess at the Riddle” of 1887-88, the turning-point in Peirce’s career towarde metaphysical speculation. Peirce’s conscious awareness of Emerson’s philososphy and poetry traces back to many sources (including Emerson’s long friendship with his father, Benjamin Peirce). The elective affi nity be- tween his and Emerson’s views allows us to appreciate that the two authors forged a central strain of idealistic-cum-realistic metaphysical thinking that framed the later Pragmatisms of James and Dewey, among others.
    [Show full text]
  • Kant on Recognizing Our Duties As God's Commands
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Asbury Theological Seminary Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 17 Issue 4 Article 3 10-1-2000 Kant on Recognizing our Duties as God's Commands John Hare Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Hare, John (2000) "Kant on Recognizing our Duties as God's Commands," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 17 : Iss. 4 , Article 3. Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol17/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. KANT ON RECOGNIZING OUR DUTIES AS GOD'S COMMANDS John E. Hare Kant both says that we should recognize our duties as God's commands, and objects to the theological version of heteronomy, 'which derives morality from a divine and supremely perfect will'. In this paper I discuss how these two views fit together, and in the process I develop a notion of autonomous submission to divine moral authority. I oppose the 'constitutive' view of autonomy proposed by J. B. Schneewind and Christine Korsgaard. I locate Kant's objection to theological heteronomy against the background of Crusius's divine command theory, and I compare Kant's views about divine authority and human political authority. 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Transcendental Philosophy 2020; 1(3): 307–312
    Journal of Transcendental Philosophy 2020; 1(3): 307–312 Book Review Huaping Lu-Adler. Kant and the Science of Logic: A Historical and Philosophical Reconstruction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2018. Reviewed by Stephen Palmquist, Department of Religion & Philosophy, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon, Hong Kong, E-mail: [email protected] https://doi.org/10.1515/jtph-2020-0021 Notwithstanding its title, this book is not about the science called “logic”—at least, not insofar as “science of logic” refers to the rules, procedures, and guiding principles that constitute the laws of thought. While Huaping Lu-Adler often refers in passing to logical operations such as syllogisms, she never discusses their rules of operation. She does mention the law/principle of (non)contradiction eight times and that of identity once (p. 14); yet these all appear in quotes or side-comments. (She never mentions the law of excluded middle.) Similarly, she limits her treat- ment of potentially relevant post-Kantian developments in logic to a few brief glosses on Boole and Frege (pp. 3, 195–7), without referring to propositional logic, fuzzy logic, dialetheism, etc. However, this is all by design, so prepared readers need not be surprised by such omissions. Indeed, as the author announces in the Introduction and repeatedly reminds her readers, the book’s focus is on “the philosophy of logic” (pp. 3–4), not on the mechanics of how logical relations as such actually function. The Introduction acknowledges that historians of logic have typically either defined logic narrowly and therefore found nothing new—and thus little worth writing about—in Kant and other Enlightenment philosophers, or else they have followed Kant’s immediate predecessors by defining logic in a broader sense than we do nowadays and have therefore written voluminously on the views of “logic” advanced during this period, but in ways that relate very little to modern con- ceptions of logic.
    [Show full text]
  • European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, VIII-2 | 2016 “I Have to Confess I Cannot Read History So,” 2
    European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy VIII-2 | 2016 Pragmatism and the Writing of History “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” On the Origins and Development of Peirce’s Philosophy of History Alessandro Topa Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/628 DOI: 10.4000/ejpap.628 ISSN: 2036-4091 Publisher Associazione Pragma Electronic reference Alessandro Topa, « “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” », European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy [Online], VIII-2 | 2016, Online since 16 January 2017, connection on 19 April 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/628 ; DOI : 10.4000/ejpap.628 This text was automatically generated on 19 April 2019. Author retains copyright and grants the European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” 1 “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” On the Origins and Development of Peirce’s Philosophy of History Alessandro Topa AUTHOR'S NOTE I am indebted to the two anonymous referees, the editors and Emily Smith for suggestions that improved this paper. “The science of knowledge is to be a pragmatic history of the human mind.” Fichte, 1794 “Nature’s highest goal, to become wholly an object to herself, is achieved only through the last and highest order of reflection, which is none other than man; or, more generally, it is what we call reason, whereby nature first completely returns into herself, and by which it becomes apparent that nature is identical from the first with what we recognize in ourselves as the intelligent and the conscious.” Schelling, 1800 “Our physical science, whatever extravagant historicists may say, seems to have sprung up uncaused except by man’s intelligence and nature’s intelligibility, which never could before be operative because it was not studied minutely.
    [Show full text]
  • A Prologue to Charles Sanders Peirce's Theory of Signs
    In Lieu of Saussure: A Prologue to Charles Sanders Peirce’s Theory of Signs E. San Juan, Jr. Language is as old as consciousness, language is practical consciousness that exists also for other men, and for that reason alone it really exists for me personally as well; language, like consciousness, only arises from the need, the necessity, of intercourse with other men. – Karl Marx, The German Ideology (1845-46) General principles are really operative in nature. Words [such as Patrick Henry’s on liberty] then do produce physical effects. It is madness to deny it. The very denial of it involves a belief in it. – C.S. Peirce, Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism (1903) The era of Saussure is dying, the epoch of Peirce is just struggling to be born. Although pragmatism has been experiencing a renaissance in philosophy in general in the last few decades, Charles Sanders Peirce, the “inventor” of this anti-Cartesian, scientific- realist method of clarifying meaning, still remains unacknowledged as a seminal genius, a polymath master-thinker. William James’s vulgarized version has overshadowed Peirce’s highly original theory of “pragmaticism” grounded on a singular conception of semiotics. Now recognized as more comprehensive and heuristically fertile than Saussure’s binary semiology (the foundation of post-structuralist textualisms) which Cold War politics endorsed and popularized, Peirce’s “semeiotics” (his preferred rubric) is bound to exert a profound revolutionary influence. Peirce’s triadic sign-theory operates within a critical- realist framework opposed to nominalism and relativist nihilism (Liszka 1996). I endeavor to outline here a general schema of Peirce’s semeiotics and initiate a hypothetical frame for interpreting Michael Ondaatje’s Anil’s’ Ghost, an exploratory or Copyright © 2012 by E.
    [Show full text]
  • Donna E. West Myrdene Anderson Editors Before and Beyond Consciousness
    Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics Donna E. West Myrdene Anderson Editors Consensus on Peirce’s Concept of Habit Before and Beyond Consciousness Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics Volume 31 Series editor Lorenzo Magnani, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy e-mail: [email protected] Editorial Board Atocha Aliseda Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Coyoacan, Mexico Giuseppe Longo Centre Cavaillès, CNRS—Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France Chris Sinha Lund University, Lund, Sweden Paul Thagard Waterloo University, Waterloo, ON, Canada John Woods University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada About this Series Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics (SAPERE) publishes new developments and advances in all the fields of philosophy, epistemology, and ethics, bringing them together with a cluster of scientific disciplines and technological outcomes: from computer science to life sciences, from economics, law, and education to engineering, logic, and mathematics, from medicine to physics, human sciences, and politics. It aims at covering all the challenging philosophical and ethical themes of contemporary society, making them appropriately applicable to contemporary theoretical, methodological, and practical problems, impasses, controversies, and conflicts. The series includes monographs, lecture notes, selected contributions from specialized conferences and workshops as well as selected Ph.D. theses. Advisory Board A. Abe, Chiba, Japan A. Pereira, São Paulo, Brazil H. Andersen, Copenhagen, Denmark L.M. Pereira, Caparica, Portugal O. Bueno, Coral Gables, USA A.-V. Pietarinen, Helsinki, Finland S. Chandrasekharan, Mumbai, India D. Portides, Nicosia, Cyprus M. Dascal, Tel Aviv, Israel D. Provijn, Ghent, Belgium G.D. Crnkovic, Västerås, Sweden J. Queiroz, Juiz de Fora, Brazil M.
    [Show full text]
  • Peter Wallensteen Understanding
    Peter Wallensteen UNDERSTANDING CONFLICT F O U R TH RESOLUTION EDITION SAGE was founded in 1965 by Sara Miller McCune to support the dissemination of usable knowledge by publishing innovative and high-quality research and teaching content. Today, we publish more than 750 journals, including those of more than 300 learned societies, more than 800 new books per year, and a growing range of library products including archives, data, case studies, reports, conference highlights, and video. SAGE remains majority-owned by our founder, and after Sara’s lifetime will become owned by a charitable trust that secures our continued independence. Los Angeles | London | Washington DC | New Delhi | Singapore 00_Wallensteen_Prelims.indd 3 3/11/2015 1:02:59 PM 4 ANALYSING CONFLICT RESOLUTION 4.1 Basic and Complex Levels of Analysis In the preceding chapters, we developed a general understanding of the concept of conflict. This is a necessary initial step in conflict analysis. Here, our task is to approach conflicts where arms are used and the role this gives to conflict resolu- tion. Armed conflict is one category of the general phenomenon of social conflict. It has some distinct features. It normally grows out of non-armed conflict, in the sequences illustrated in Figure 3.3, but involves not just a shift in behaviour. It has other aspects associated with the three concepts of parties, incompatibility and action. First, there is a particular role for the state as soon as a conflict becomes armed. The reasons for this are explained in Section 4.2. There are also armed, as well as unarmed, non-state actors in many armed conflicts, and, for a fuller analy- sis, it is necessary to include them.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    https://lthj.qut.edu.au/ LAW, TECHNOLOGY AND HUMANS Volume 2 (2) 2020 https://doi.org/10.5204/lthj.1483 Divergent Realities Across the Digital–Material Divide Elizabeth Englezos Griffith University, Australia Abstract This article utilises the example of Australia’s social welfare agency ‘Centrelink’ and its Online Compliance Intervention (OCI) program to illustrate the process of digital translation and digital determinations of material reality. The article explains the digital translation process through the adaptation of various aspects of Charles Sanders Peirce’s philosophy such as the triadic sign model, signification, fallibilism and synechism. Semiotics, or the ‘study of meaning making’, highlights the subjective nature of data analysis. A semiotic approach not only explains the differing realities of digital and material space and the lack of distinction between digital and material phenomena, but also provides further insight into algorithmic determinations of reality and the inherent limitations on our knowledge of digital or material reality. The same data can produce divergent realities within digital space and between the material and digital spaces. The article concludes that the design of algorithms, the nature of their representations and the outcomes they generate lack the complexity and nuance of reality, and disregards social influences on meaning and interpretation. As illustrated by the real-life failure of Centrelink’s OCI, this article warns against interpreting the digital as an accurate rendering of the real. Keywords: Digital translation; algorithms; reality; semiotics; digital–material divide. 1. Introduction The all-pervasive nature of digital technology has resulted in a new world order where the digital space has become an increasingly important place of personal existence.
    [Show full text]
  • Peirce for Whitehead Handbook
    For M. Weber (ed.): Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought Ontos Verlag, Frankfurt, 2008, vol. 2, 481-487 Charles S. Peirce (1839-1914) By Jaime Nubiola1 1. Brief Vita Charles Sanders Peirce [pronounced "purse"], was born on 10 September 1839 in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to Sarah and Benjamin Peirce. His family was already academically distinguished, his father being a professor of astronomy and mathematics at Harvard. Though Charles himself received a graduate degree in chemistry from Harvard University, he never succeeded in obtaining a tenured academic position. Peirce's academic ambitions were frustrated in part by his difficult —perhaps manic-depressive— personality, combined with the scandal surrounding his second marriage, which he contracted soon after his divorce from Harriet Melusina Fay. He undertook a career as a scientist for the United States Coast Survey (1859- 1891), working especially in geodesy and in pendulum determinations. From 1879 through 1884, he was a part-time lecturer in Logic at Johns Hopkins University. In 1887, Peirce moved with his second wife, Juliette Froissy, to Milford, Pennsylvania, where in 1914, after 26 years of prolific and intense writing, he died of cancer. He had no children. Peirce published two books, Photometric Researches (1878) and Studies in Logic (1883), and a large number of papers in journals in widely differing areas. His manuscripts, a great many of which remain unpublished, run to some 100,000 pages. In 1931-58, a selection of his writings was arranged thematically and published in eight volumes as the Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Beginning in 1982, a number of volumes have been published in the series A Chronological Edition, which will ultimately consist of thirty volumes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Need for Cosmology in Peirce's Philosophy
    SCIO. Revista de Filosofía, n.º 12, Noviembre de 2016, 51-73, ISSN: 1887-9853 HINTS TOWARD COSMOLOGY: THE NEED FOR COSMOLOGY IN PEIRCE’S PHILOSOPHY SUGERENCIAS EN TORNO A LA COSMOLOGÍA: LA NECESIDAD DE LA COSMOLOGÍA EN LA FILOSOFÍA DE PEIRCE Maria Regina Brioschia Fechas de recepción y aceptación: 16 de marzo de 2016, 24 de octubre de 2016 Resumen: El objetivo del presente artículo es hacer patente la necesidad de una cosmología en el pensamiento de Peirce. Para alcanzar dicho ob- jetivo me propongo clarificar en primer lugar la definición de cosmología de Peirce y su lugar en la clasificación de las ciencias. Luego me propongo arrojar luz sobre la implicación de la cosmología en la concepción de la metafísica y de la lógica de Peirce, y elucidar estas conexiones a la vista de su “Synechism”. Finalmente, a partir de los resultados obtenidos, intento aportar una descripción sumaria de la cosmología de Peirce, distinta de su interpretación habitual. Palabras clave: cosmología, cosmogonía, universo, metafísica, lógica, sinejismo, categorías. Abstract: The aim of the present paper is to show the need for cosmol- ogy in Peirce’s thought. To reach this goal, I first clarify Peirce’s definition of cosmology and its place in the classification of the sciences. Then, I shed slight on the entailment of cosmology in Peirce’s understanding of metaphysics and of logic, and I elucidate these connections in view of a Profesora de Filosofía, Università degli Studi di Milano. Correspondencia: Università degli Studi di Milano. Via Festa del Perdono, 7. 20122 Milano. Italia. E-mail: [email protected] 52 Maria Regina Brioschi Synechism.
    [Show full text]
  • Peirce, Pragmatism, and the Right Way of Thinking
    SANDIA REPORT SAND2011-5583 Unlimited Release Printed August 2011 Peirce, Pragmatism, and The Right Way of Thinking Philip L. Campbell Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 and Livermore, California 94550 Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under Contract DE-AC04-94AL85000.. Approved for public release; further dissemination unlimited. Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily con- stitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.
    [Show full text]