[Xmca-l] Re: The Semiotic Stance.pdf

[mike cole]

The projectile for might be called imagination?


On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co
> wrote:

> Right, Andy: the word ‘object’ is a sign whose object is itself over the
> horizon, projected there by writers and readers alike as they interpret the
> sign.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 30, 2016, at 8:52 PM, Andy Blunden <ablunden@mira.net> wrote:
> >
> > :) It is impossible to argue with what you say, Martin, without using
> the word (i.e. sign) "object" in the belioef that the reader will
> understand what is being referenced!
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Andy Blunden
> > http://home.mira.net/~andy
> > http://www.brill.com/products/book/origins-collective-decision-making
> > On 1/07/2016 11:14 AM, Martin John Packer wrote:
> >> My take on this diagram, Greg, is that Tony wants to illustrate how in
> Peirce’s scheme the object is, so to speak, always 'over the horizon.’ I
> think we’re back here to appearance/reality: the sign is what appears, but
> it is taken as an appearance of an object that is not given directly.
> >>
> >> Martin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 7:42 PM, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Tony's figure 7.3 makes me doubly anxious
> >>> about this since it seems to suggest that the object and the
> representamen
> >>> exist in different realms. I'm fine with that kind of dualism in a
> >>> dualistic account, but it seems not quite right to have such a dualism
> as
> >>> part of an account whose goal is non-dualism).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>


-- 

It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an object
that creates history. Ernst Boesch