Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3h

Take for illustration the sensation undergone by a child that puts its forefinger into a flame with the acquisition of a habit of keeping all its members out of all flames.

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3h

I use the word "self-controlled" for "controlled by the thinker's self," and not for "uncontrolled" except in its own spontaneous, i.e. automatic, self-development, as Professor J. M. Baldwin uses the word.

1 2

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3h

An "Experience" is a brutally produced conscious effect that contributes to a habit, self-controlled, yet so satisfying, on deliberation, as to be destructible by no positive exercise of internal vigour.

1 2

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3h

The "Actual" is that which is met with in the past, present, or future.

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3h

make up a set of circumstances sufficient to distinguish it from all other events; and these belong to it, i.e. would be true if predicated of it, whether A, B, or C Actually ascertains them or not.
/2x

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3h

Thus, the substance of a dream is not Real, since it was such as it was, merely in that a dreamer so dreamed it; but the fact of the dream is Real, if it was dreamed; since if so, its date, the name of the dreamer, etc.,
/1

1 1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3h

"Real" is a word invented in the thirteenth century to signify having Properties, i.e. characters sufficing to identify their subject, and possessing these whether they be anywise attributed to it by any single man or group of men, or not.

2 1

Reposted by Charles S. Peirce

Rorty QOTD @rortyquotes.bsky.social · 17h

Edifying philosophy falls into self-deception whenever it tries to do more than send the conversation off in new directions.
'Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature' p.378
#Rorty
#Pragmatism
#Conversation

That is why "existentialism"—and, more generally, edifying philosophy—can be only reactive, why it falls into self-deception whenever it tries to do more than send the conversation off in new directions. Such new directions may, perhaps, engender new normal discourses, new sciences, new philosophical research programs, and thus new objective truths. But they are not the point of edifying philosophy, only accidental byproducts. The point is always the same—to perform the social function which Dewey called "breaking the crust of convention," preventing man from deluding himself with the notion that he knows himself, or anything else, except under optional descriptions.

2 3

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 18h

This argument, however, only covers a part of the question. It does not go to show that there is no cognition undetermined except by another like it.

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 1d

The apprehension of space and time results, according to him, from a mental process, the "Synthesis der Apprehension in der Anschauting." (See Critik d. reinen Vernunft. Ed. 1781, pp. 98 et seq.) My theory is merely an account of this synthesis.
/2x

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 1d

Kant, it is true, makes space and time intuitions, or rather forms of intuition, but it is not essential to his theory that intuition should mean more than "individual representation."
/1

1 1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 1d

The above theory of space and time does not conflict with that of Kant so much as it appears to do. They are in fact the solutions of different questions.

1 2

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 1d

Still, it would be impossible to find a passage where the authority of Aristotle is directly denied upon any logical question.

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 1d

Recognized authorities were certainly sometimes disputed in the twelfth century; the mutual contradictions ensured that, and the authority of philosophers was regarded as inferior to that of the theologians.

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 2d

This use of "speculation" did not take root, because that word already had another in exact and widely different meaning.

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 2d

tunc antem facie ad faciem, he called the former speculation in the latter intuition.
/2x

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 2d

The word intuitus first occurs as a technical term in St. Anselm's Monologium. he wished to distinguish between our knowledge of God and our knowledge of finite things (and in, the next world, of God, also); And thinking of the saying of St Paul, Videmus nunc per speculum in oenigmate:
/1

1 1 3

Reposted by Charles S. Peirce

𝖂𝖊𝖗𝖙𝖍𝖊𝖎𝖒𝖊𝖗 @wertheimer.bsky.social · 28d

A finite interval of time
generally contains
an innumerable series of feelings;
and when these become
welded together in association
the result is a general idea.

Charles Sanders Peirce
10 Sep 1839🎂
father of #pragmatism

1 4

Reposted by Charles S. Peirce

Rorty QOTD @rortyquotes.bsky.social · 2d

A talent for speaking differently, rather than for arguing well, is the chief instrument of cultural change.
'Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity' p.7
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Vocabulary

I can sum up by redescribing what, in my view, the revolutionaries and poets of two centuries ago were getting at. What was glimpsed at the end of the eighteenth century was that anything could be made to look good or bad, important or unimportant, useful or useless, by being redescribed. What Hegel describes as the process of spirit gradually becoming self-conscious of its intrinsic nature is better described as the process of European linguistic practices changing at a faster and faster rate. The phenomenon Hegel describes is that of more people offering more radical redescriptions of more things than ever before, of young people going through half a dozen spiritual gestalt-switches before reaching adulthood. What the Romantics expressed as the claim that imagination, rather than reason, is the central human faculty was the realization that a talent for speaking differently, rather than for arguing well, is the chief instrument of cultural change.

3 3

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 2d

It’s from near the end of this:

en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Questio...

Questions concerning certain Faculties claimed for Man - Wikisource, the free online library

en.m.wikisource.org

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 2d

In a subsequent paper, I shall trace the consequences, of these principles, in reference to the questions of reality, of individuality, and of the validity of the laws of logic.

1 1

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 2d

No cognition not determined by a previous cognition, then, can be known. It does not exist, then, first, because it is absolutely incognizable, and second, because a cognition only exists so far as it is known

1 1 2

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 2d

Besides, all the cognitive faculties we know of are relative, and consequently their products are relations. But the cognition of a relation is determined by previous cognitions.

1 1

Reposted by Charles S. Peirce

Center for Dewey Studies @deweycenter.siu.edu · 2d

“It is hardly worth while to oppose science and art sharply to one another, when the deficiencies and troubles of life are so evidently due to separation between art and blind routine and blind impulse. Routine exemplifies the uniformities and recurrences of...
(1/3)

John Dewey standing at a desk with several books resting atop it. Behind the desk is a large painting of John Dewey seated in a comfortable chair with a book.

1 1 4

Charles S. Peirce @charlespeirce.bsky.social · 3d

But to adduce the cognition by which a given cognition has been determined is to explain the determinations of that cognition. And it is the only way of explaining them.

1 2