[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

:) 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 Blunden
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.


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).