> So, is the structure of language a blueprint for the structure of the universe?
Language seems to me a utility in itself. Language enables us to take signs that rise in reality and transform them into communication. The communications convey meanings. Language’s statement of what something means is a product of our will to think. (In that sense, we are prior to language. As is reality.) The structure of the universe has no blueprint save what we create as guesses. Insofar as we are aware of reality – the universe, the cosmos, everything, all – language helps us guess what its blueprint might be. Doesn’t Peirce say that most of our thought is abduction? (Odd the double meaning these days.) Anyway, it seems a good guess is that the universe creates continuously according to patterns science seeks to guess with ever greater accuracy. And that the greater part is unguessed and a mystery. Wherefore fallibility (humility, non-idolatry) should reign.
(Response to a question on the Peirce List.)