abba's way

Triadic Philosophy – Meta and Index

The following is a note sent to the Peirce list today. What I have done with Triadic Philosophy is expressed in several Kindle books which I recommend. They can all be found and sampled here.

I send posts here. I assume when nothing shows up in my inbox it is because there has been no response. Which is not a problem. I mention it merely to ascertain that this is why I do not see responses. This would be as it should be as this is a tiny stream next to what has been a veritable river of consideration and attention to serious matters. There is also the matter of veering from Peirce.I can only infer that some veers are respectable and others not so much though the not so much seem to receive the bulk of content in the main discussion.

One thing that strikes me is the notion that a sign embraces an entire triad. To this I say fine. But for purposes of conscious consideration I find myself operating on the premise that a sign is a foundational reality that is in fact the trigger or first element in thought. This is followed by an index which may be seen as an opposition or at  least a barrier or as I sometimes suggest a colander through which the original consideration (sign)  passes, en route to becoming the third step in the process which I take to be an expression, an action, or both. In other words, index is something that is either spontaneously present as a barrier or which is the product of decision, a voluntary interposition of conditions which may modify and influence signs as they pass through the triadic process.

It seems to me also that the tendency of the present discussion is to flirt with the possibility that there might be, to this thinking process, a practical result. I have always assumed so, or why have pragmatism in the first place? But apparently, to get the sign Peirce through the colander of philosophy, it may be apposite to marshal resources, what Kenneth Burke called a viaticum, for the journey to acts that manifest beauty and truth as unity itself. That I take to be the subject of the book under discussion.

Now if any of this is puzzling, I am in receipt of a clarification made possible via the Socratic operation of Twitter. It leads to my confession that puzzling is what I do. I never admitted that before, because I never heard it in such candid terms. I would not dare to suggest what it means, though I have an idea whose key word is, as has been suggested, fallibility.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s