[Inquiry] Re: Grounds And Respects -- Discussion

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

GAR.  Discussion Note 2

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

JP = Jim Piat

Re: GAR 5.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-March/002445.html
In: GAR.    http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-March/thread.html#2441

JP: Ah more good stuff --

JP: Yes here I think Peirce is speaking of indexes.

CSP: | Section 1.  Of Truth (cont.)
     |
     | B.  A representation agreeing with its object,
     |     without essential resemblance thereto,
     |     is a sign.  The truth of a sign,
     |     I denominate 'veracity'.
     |
     |     Veracity consists in a constant connection between
     |     the sign and the thing;  for if the sign sometimes
     |     goes without the thing, then it may speak falsely,
     |     and if the thing goes without the sign, it may be
     |     belied in negative cases.

JP: I think I follow and agree with the above, I not sure I understand
    where Peirce is going with the following.  I suppose he is building
    toward some notion of truth captured by the symbol (having established
    the truth or versimilitude of the icon and the veracity of the index) but
    I'm curious how he pulls it off.  I've been trying to follow along in the
    collected works -- actually trying to sneak ahead but I'm going to wait for
    you to do the hard work of pulling out the nuggets that move us along briskly.
    Well, a lot more quickly than I could do it!

JP: Enjoying the tutorial Jon  -- Don't worry about
    my "objections and corrections"  -- just my way
    of trying to understand what is being discussed.

Jim,

It's a little like excavating the seven cities of Troy.
I collected these passages from MS 70 (1861-1862) as
being the earliest, fairly intact specimens of what
we find to be a familiar theme in his later work.
I think that most readers will agree that the
later developments of this same analysis are
much more polished and convincing overall,
but these early avatars show their roots
a little better.

The basic idea that I'm pursuing here with respect
to the idea of a ground goes back at least as far
as Aristole's laws of logic, specifically, that
reference to a ground or respect is a form of
equivocation resolver that serves to prepare
the linguistic material for the application
of logical laws.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o