2. When I don't have time to really participate -- follow up, etc. -- I resist the temptation to speak up (almost as an ethical matter: that I shouldn't speak if I'm not able to engage). However, on this extremely rich, interesting, and important thread, let me just offer this:
However else we might want to specify what "concepts" are, they are, most profoundly, semiosic (in the Peircean sense) formations. My own take is that, as semiosis is activity, "concepts" are formations in/of activity. For me, this is a matter of an actualist ( > action) ontology, as differentiated from a realist ( > "rei"="things") ontology.
Again, I am violating my own rule against putting in my own "2 cents" when I'm not available to follow through. (I could detail demands on my time now; but you don't need to hear from me about such excuses.)
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Jay Lemke wrote:
When a topic like Concepts has gotten as long as this one has, my advice is to delete all the quoted prior messages except the most recent two or three. That should help. By the way, it is NOT easy to do this the first time, but after someone takes the plunge, it will be easy for the rest of us. Jay Lemke Senior Research Scientist Laboratory for Comparative Human Cognition University of California - San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla, California 92093-0506 Professor (Adjunct status 2009-11) School of Education University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI 48109 www.umich.edu/~jaylemke Professor Emeritus City University of New York
__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca