Pragmatism, logic, and manuscript R318

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Tony Jappy
{"title":"Pragmatism, logic, and manuscript R318","authors":"Tony Jappy","doi":"10.1515/css-2024-2021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Whereas it is generally held that Peirce’s logic contributed largely to a proof of his pragmatism, particularly in the 1907 manuscript R318, the paper adopts an alternative approach and posits that after 1903, Peirce’s conception of the sign and the way it functions evolved significantly in the period leading to and including the various versions of this never-to-be-published article which set out his conception of pragmatism in 1907. The paper suggests that in attempting to explain his pragmatism in manuscript R318, Peirce was consciously departing from earlier conceptions of the sign and the way it relates to its two correlates. It suggests that this departure nevertheless contributed to the continuing evolution of his logic, and shows how R318 anticipates features of the systems described in the 23 December 1908 letter to Lady Welby and subsequent drafts while nevertheless being a completely different approach to signification. It finally suggests that there is a potential inconsistency in the definition of semiosis given in the manuscript and the theoretical distribution of the interpretant system described therein. The present paper is offered as one possible account of some stages in the evolution of Peirce’s logic.","PeriodicalId":52036,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Semiotic Studies","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Semiotic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/css-2024-2021","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Whereas it is generally held that Peirce’s logic contributed largely to a proof of his pragmatism, particularly in the 1907 manuscript R318, the paper adopts an alternative approach and posits that after 1903, Peirce’s conception of the sign and the way it functions evolved significantly in the period leading to and including the various versions of this never-to-be-published article which set out his conception of pragmatism in 1907. The paper suggests that in attempting to explain his pragmatism in manuscript R318, Peirce was consciously departing from earlier conceptions of the sign and the way it relates to its two correlates. It suggests that this departure nevertheless contributed to the continuing evolution of his logic, and shows how R318 anticipates features of the systems described in the 23 December 1908 letter to Lady Welby and subsequent drafts while nevertheless being a completely different approach to signification. It finally suggests that there is a potential inconsistency in the definition of semiosis given in the manuscript and the theoretical distribution of the interpretant system described therein. The present paper is offered as one possible account of some stages in the evolution of Peirce’s logic.
实用主义、逻辑和手稿 R318
一般认为,皮尔斯的逻辑学在很大程度上证明了他的实用主义,尤其是在 1907 年的 R318 手稿中,而本文则采用了另一种方法,认为在 1903 年之后,皮尔斯对符号及其运作方式的概念在这一时期发生了重大演变,包括这篇从未发表的文章的各种版本,它在 1907 年阐述了皮尔斯的实用主义概念。本文认为,皮尔斯试图在 R318 号手稿中解释他的实用主义时,有意识地偏离了早先关于符号及其与两个关联词之间关系的概念。研究表明,这种偏离有助于他的逻辑学的持续发展,并展示了 R318 如何预示了 1908 年 12 月 23 日给韦尔比夫人的信及其后的草稿中所描述的系统的特征,同时又是一种完全不同的符号方法。文章最后指出,手稿中给出的符号学定义与手稿中描述的解释系统的理论分布可能存在不一致之处。本文是对皮尔斯逻辑演变过程中某些阶段的一种可能解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Chinese Semiotic Studies
Chinese Semiotic Studies HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信