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

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



...and a way to bridge between present (& past) and future. Horizons are spatial, temporal, and more.

> On Jul 1, 2016, at 1:14 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
> 
> I am focusing the verb project*ing. *An action without he expenditure of
> energy? A way to bridge between here and over the horizon?
> mike
> 
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co
>> wrote:
> 
>> Affirmative.
>> 
>> Except, as you know Mike, this projection that is interpretation isn’t a
>> force, it’s an act (in the non-technical sense); an aspect of a project
>> (Andy will be happy to hear).
>> 
>>> On Jul 1, 2016, at 12:58 PM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Ooops, the projectile *force *might be called imagination?
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:57 AM, mike cole <mcole@ucsd.edu> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
>> object
>>> that creates history. Ernst Boesch
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an object
> that creates history. Ernst Boesch