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

[Andy Blunden]

:) 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).
>
>
>