gmane.science.philosophy.peirce

Fwd: Peirce Society Facebook Group

Gary Richmond — 2012-05-23T16:08:09

Gary Richmond
Philosophy and Critical Thinking
Communication Studies
LaGuardia College of the City University of New York
E202-O
718 482-5700

*** *** *** ***
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" 
to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to peirce-l but to iulist< at >iulist.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe peirce-l" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .

RE: Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM

Eugene Halton — 2012-05-23T15:34:14

Gary Moore: Only I can die my death, or have my cancer if that is better. Any information about death or cancer comes from comparison, analogy, likeness, but like my body is ontologically different from everyone else’s body so my death or my cancer is different from everyone else’s.

Gene Halton: It seems to me that you are treating the inferential communicative process of semiosis as not inclusive of the process of one’s own death. “Ordinary reality,” the practical, is admittedly more concrete than theoretical philosophical discourse, as Peirce explicitly admits. That is why it is inadequate for a philosophy of the long run, just as a theoretical philosophy of the long run is inadequate for living one’s life in a mortal limit, with all the passionate resources that go far deeper than language available. But death remains a biosemiotic and social process nonetheless. The concreteness of one’s death is not an isolate instance.

Alfred North Whitehead: “...among the primary elements of natu

Conference: The American Style in Philosophy

Khadimir — 2012-05-23T15:12:22

The American Style in Philosophy

*Two Day International Conference*
*June 11th-12th, 2012*
*University College Dublin*

Supported by:
The IRCHSS (“New Ideas” Award in the Humanities and Social Sciences)
UCD School of Philosophy
UCD Clinton Institute for American Studies
International Journal of Philosophical Studies
 http://www.american-voice.org/Conference Outline

In comparing the styles of American and French philosophical writing, James
Conant has noted the characteristic “diffidence” of writers like Thoreau
when compared to the characteristic “brilliance” of intellectuals like
Derrida. Conant provocatively suggests that this Parisian brilliance most
typically registers “what is now taken as the sound of philosophy”. “The
sound of much of the language in Thoreau’s *Walden*”, he writes, “is apt to
strike a reader – at least on a first encounter – as not particularly
philosophical at all, as not even trying to sound like philosophy”.
(Conant, J., “Cavell and the Concept of

Fw: Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM

Gary Moore — 2012-05-23T06:56:20



----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Gary Moore <gottlos752004< at >yahoo.com>
To: Catherine Legg <clegg< at >waikato.ac.nz> 
Cc: "PEIRCE-L< at >iulist.iupui.edu" <PEIRCE-L< at >iulist.iupui.edu> 
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2012 2:22 AM
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM


 
 
From:Catherine Legg <clegg< at >waikato.ac.nz>
To: peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu 
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 10:48 PM
Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM
 
Catherine Legg: Hello list! Here we are at IU - thank you to all those who put work into moving us over. 
It seems the instigators of this thread have tired of it but I’m just catching up. 
----------------------------------------------
Gary Moore: I have not. It seems the main problem is “ordinary reality” which all human beings must overridingly deal with above and beyond mere philosophical discourse. Probably I did not make this perfe

peirce-l archives currently available

Benjamin Udell — 2012-05-22T04:50:14

Jon, list,

The I.U. archives not public. I think that this is a worthwhile issue. 
The I.U. peirce-l archive is the official record for peirce-l since some 
time in July 2011. However, there is also the gmane archive which has 
current posts. Here's the WHOLE story on currently available peirce-l 
archives:

*The Indiana University peirce-l archive. *
Early July 2011 - present.
To be able to modify subscription settings online and view archives, go 
to https://iulist.iupui.edu

 1. Click on the "First login?" link in the upper left-hand corner.
 2. Enter your email address and click the "Request first password" button.
 3. Go to your emails and open the message from the I.U. List Service
    and click on the link for choosing your password.
 4. Enter your new password (twice) and then click the "Submit" button.
    The password must be at least 8 characters long and contain at least
    one number and at least one letter. (Note to I.U. Network password
    holders: Do NOT use your I.U. Network password.)
 5

Re: Testing Archive Links To See If They Are Public

Jon Awbrey — 2012-05-22T04:44:19

Nope, you have to be registered and logged in to access archive links.

Jon

Testing Archive Links To See If They Are Public

Jon Awbrey — 2012-05-22T04:38:58

https://iulist.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2012-05/msg00065.html

Re: A Petition to Require Free Access over the Internet to Scientific Journal Articles Arising from Taxpayer-Funded Research

Benjamin Udell — 2012-05-22T04:12:01

Also the research data sets and, where technically feasible, specialized 
programs/code used to process the data. - Best, Ben

On 5/22/2012 12:04 AM, Jon Awbrey wrote:



-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" 
to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to peirce-l but to iulist< at >iulist.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe peirce-l" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .

A Petition to Require Free Access over the Internet to Scientific Journal Articles Arising from Taxpayer-Funded Research

Jon Awbrey — 2012-05-22T04:04:32

A Petition to Require Free Access over the Internet to Scientific Journal Articles Arising from Taxpayer-Funded Research

❝We believe in the power of the Internet to foster innovation, research, and education. Requiring the published results 
of taxpayer-funded research to be posted on the Internet in human and machine readable form would provide access to 
patients and caregivers, students and their teachers, researchers, entrepreneurs, and other taxpayers who paid for the 
research. Expanding access would speed the research process and increase the return on our investment in scientific 
research.

❝The highly successful Public Access Policy of the National Institutes of Health proves that this can be done without 
disrupting the research process, and we urge President Obama to act now to implement open access policies for all 
federal agencies that fund scientific research.❞

Register (if not already) and sign on this page:

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/require-free-access-over-i

test 2 ignore/delete

Gary Richmond — 2012-05-21T22:18:10

test 2 ignore/delete
 
 
Gary Richmond
Philosophy and Critical Thinking
Communication Studies
LaGuardia College of the City University of New York
 
718 482-5700
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
IF POSSIBLE PLEASE CC messages to: gary.richmond< at >gmail.com

-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" 
to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to peirce-l but to iulist< at >iulist.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe peirce-l" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .

test: ignore/delete

Gary Richmond — 2012-05-21T22:09:06

test: ignore/delete

-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" 
to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to peirce-l but to iulist< at >iulist.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe peirce-l" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .

Re: Knowledge Workers of the World, Unite❢

Jon Awbrey — 2012-05-21T16:34:25

Re: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2012/02/02/knowledge-workers-of-the-world-unite%E2%9D%A2/

Latest comments —

Comments on Peter Cameron's Blog

Post 6. Open Access Publishing

• http://cameroncounts.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/open-access-publishing-2/

Comment 6.1

By nature and training a whole systems thinker, I tend to view the architecture of commerce, the architecture of 
government, and the architecture of inquiry as participants in a larger system.

When it comes to the desiderata of inquiry, I find myself constantly returning to the guidance of Charles S. Peirce, so 
elegantly maximized in the following words:

“Do not block the way of inquiry.”
• http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2004-January/001027.html

My last best expression of how I saw the problem of sustaining the soul of inquiry within the body of the post*modern 
millennial university is contained in the following paper:

Conceptual Barriers to Creating Integrative Universities
• http://org.sagepub.com/content/8/2/269.abstract

Re: Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM

Gary Moore — 2012-05-21T07:22:13

 
 
From:Catherine Legg <clegg< at >waikato.ac.nz>
To: peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu 
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 10:48 PM
Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM
 
Catherine Legg: Hello list! Here we are at IU - thank you to all those who put work into moving us over. 
It seems the instigators of this thread have tired of it but I’m just catching up. 
----------------------------------------------
Gary Moore: I have not. It seems the main problem is “ordinary reality” which all human beings must overridingly deal with above and beyond mere philosophical discourse. Probably I did not make this perfectly clear to begin with. I thought my, Gary Moore, or your, Catherine Legg or Benjamin Udell, dying or having incurable cancer would have been the pure province of an “ordinary discourse”, one that everyone must give way to, must acknowledge as having an importance that trivializes “philosophical discourse” in the face of one

Re: Inquiry Live and Logic Live

Jon Awbrey — 2012-05-21T04:18:14

Catherine Legg wrote:

Now is the wiki of your discontent ...
Oh never mind ...

At any rate, more specific comments will always be welcome.

Many regards,

Jon

RE: Inquiry Live and Logic Live

Catherine Legg — 2012-05-21T03:50:57

Hi Jon - I clicked on those links you cite below and found absolutely no
content there.

Kind regards,
Cathy

-----Original Message-----
From: peirce-l-request< at >iulist.iupui.edu
[mailto:peirce-l-request< at >iulist.iupui.edu] On Behalf Of Jon Awbrey
Sent: Friday, 18 May 2012 4:32 a.m.
To: Arisbe List; Inquiry List; Peirce List
Cc: Michel Bauwens; Michel Bauwens
Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Inquiry Live and Logic Live

[...]

Still exploring the possibilities of architecture and information in
parallel,
I created a couple of focal wiki pages called "Inquiry Live" and "Logic
Live".

. http://mywikibiz.com/Inquiry_Live
. http://mywikibiz.com/Logic_Live

The "Live" bit indicated a couple of design goals that I had in mind at
the time,
inter-activity and the use of animations to illustrate proofs in logical
graphs.
I ramified the logic focus by developing a syllabus of logical topics and
then
I mirrored and interlinked the whole structure across a number of wiki
sites,
regarded as peer installations.

Well, you know how it goes

RE: Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM

Catherine Legg — 2012-05-21T03:48:33

Hello list! Here we are at IU - thank you to all those who put work into
moving us over.



It seems the instigators of this thread have tired of it but I’m just
catching up. I’ve been thinking in particular about the issue of *solipsism*.
I remember looking at this issue in detail when studying Wittgenstein as an
undergraduate. At that time I thought, what could be more recondite or
pointless a philosophical question than whether you are the only actually
existing person in the Universe? No matter how difficult it might be as an
intellectual exercise to counter-prove clever arguments for the view.



However now looking at the issue through a more pragmatist lens it strikes
me as one of the most urgent that human beings face in lived experience. I
mean the issue of whether one’s relationship with other human personalities
is **real** and, in fact, if it is (real), what would that mean exactly. It
seems increasingly common these days to comment on narcissism as a
phenomenon of contemporary personality,

Re: Important: The PEIRCE-L as migrated to the IU List system

Jon Awbrey — 2012-05-21T03:42:19

Bill, Ben, List ...

I notice that the list archive is currently marked "private".
Is there any chance that it will eventually be public, that is,
open to standard search engines and the Internet Archive, with
permalinks that can be used for later reference?

Thanks,

Jon

Fw: ON THE Present

Gary Moore — 2012-05-18T11:09:48



----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Gary Moore <gottlos752004< at >yahoo.com>
To: Gary Moore <gottlos752004< at >yahoo.com> 
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 2:09 AM
Subject: ON THE Present


 
 
From:Benjamin Udell <budell< at >nyc.rr.com>
To: peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu 
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 3:40 PM
Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM
 
Gary, list,

I think we've reached some impasses here. 

Benjamin Udell: You assert solipsism, but you deny "self." Yet solipsism just means the belief that there is only oneself and no other. 
--------------------------
Gary Moore: But I thought ‘we’, and I know ‘I’, diversified special definitions of solipsism, specifically a solipsism of practiced applied specifically to perception. But now you pop back to ‘solipsism’ discussed solely as a world view or philosophy or metaphysics or something. I am confused.
------------------------------------------------
Benjamin Udell: Solipsism by the

trial

Gary Moore — 2012-05-18T11:08:04

-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" 
to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-l< at >iulist.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to peirce-l but to iulist< at >iulist.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe peirce-l" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .

Re: [peirce-l] ORDINARY DISCOURSE AS THE FINAL CAUSE TO ALL INTELLECTUAL ENDEAVORS OR SKEPTICISM

Benjamin Udell — 2012-05-17T20:40:18

Gary, list,

I think we've reached some impasses here.

You assert solipsism, but you deny "self." Yet solipsism just means the 
belief that there is only oneself and no other.

Solipsism by the same stroke means the belief that the world is just 
oneself without any other. Yet you deny "world," "totality," and so on 
because there is always new information or whatever; evidently you 
believe that one cannot refer (for example by words like "world" and 
"totality") to future or possible information. Yet your assertion of 
solipsism means that you believe that all new information will still 
conform to there being only yourself and no other.  This implies that 
you believe that one can refer to future or possible information; but 
that's just what's done by terms like "world" and "totality." That's 
also what's done by the idea of a rule projectable beyond any definite 
set of enumerated instances.

You seem to think that one must need to be able list the members of a 
totality in order for it to make sense.

Inquiry Live and Logic Live

Jon Awbrey — 2012-05-17T16:32:13

Peircers,

Prompted by observations I had been making over a long period of time about
the problems of fragmentation and increasing insularity in web communities,
and inspired in part by discussions I had been having with Michel Bauwens
of the P2P (Peer2Peer) Foundation, I started a project a few years back
that was intended to explore architectural solutions to these problems
while developing a body of useful content in the process.

As I reflected on the architecture that might be demanded by the task,
at least to make a good beginning at organizing the available resources,
it took on the shape of an elliptical orbit, with content nodes revolving
about two ruling foci, called “Inquiry” and “Logic”, respectively.

Still exploring the possibilities of architecture and information in parallel,
I created a couple of focal wiki pages called “Inquiry Live” and “Logic Live”.

• http://mywikibiz.com/Inquiry_Live
• http://mywikibiz.com/Logic_Live

The “Live” bit indicated a couple of design