[xmca] signs and tools-for-thought: an analogy?

In an earlier post, I repeated Peirce's view that thought is
sign-activity, and asked, if signs are merely tools for thought, then what
do we take thought, itself, to be?

Reflecting on that, it occurs to me that it might be helpful to suggest
this as an analogy:

To say that signs are tools for thought, is rather like saying that
molecules are tools for heat.

To think of thought AS sign activity, is it helpful, as a lame analogy, to
think of heat AS Brownian motion?

Tony Whitson
UD School of Education
NEWARK DE 19716

twhitson@udel.edu
_______________________________

"those who fail to reread
  are obliged to read the same story everywhere"
                   -- Roland Barthes, S/Z (1970)
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Sun Sep 9 20:34 PDT 2007