Percy-L: Literary, Religious, Scientific, and Philosophical Discussion of Walker Percy

["Parlin, Steven" <PARLINS AT culver.org>]

I agree, Karey, that the list should resume it's course... but this matter of "gay marriage"  is not totally unrelated... a discussion of the word "marriage" and whether or not we can have it mean whatever we want it to mean is, I think, very relevant. By redifining it, we are transforming our understanding of it, and the larger repercussions will be devastating (historically, the breakdown of family has always preceded the collapse of a civilization). I don't think we should be tampering with it so willy-nilly.

 

And, for this reason, I was not entering this discussion for "recreational" reasons. Marriage (and family), is one of the fundamental pillars of civilized society.

 

As for the triangles and triads, could you or else someone bring us back up to speed on where that discussion left off, a brief summary would be helpful too.

 

BTW: I can't open the link: http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/epc/srb/srb/10-3edit.html even when I paste in manually.

 

Steve

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Frentz [mailto:mfrentz AT bbn.com]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 3:04 PM
To: Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion
Subject: Re: [percy-l] gays, biblical authority and Percy's language theory --

Karey,

re your first question -- this paper was "discovered" yesterday and floated on the peirce-l list (though the paper is four years old, I wasn't aware of it either and I'm a big fan of Deacon).  Interesting coupling of the "reproductive properties" of memes in terms of semiosis (interpretant spawning yet another sign). 

Terrence W. Deacon, Memes as Signs
 http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/epc/srb/srb/10-3edit.html

Unfortunately the two other books he comments on as upcoming in "Note 10" still aren't to be found.  Floyd Merrel's 1997 book on Peirce, Signs, and Meaning is also quite an interesting read in this area.

re the second question -- I personally think this whole notion is irrelevant, as long as the triangle is interpreted by the area rather than the edges, all vertices are connected to the other two, a dyadic relationships aren't necessarily implied to me by this.  I find it interesting that Peirce doesn't really seem to have used either notation in his various descriptions of the same concepts (at least not in the Collected Papers), yet he his existential graphs are nothing less than a graphical computer.  BTW, a *great* reference for anyone attempting to surf the CP on their own is Charles S. Peirce's Philosophy of Signs: Essays in Comparative Semiotics (Advances in Semiotics)
by Gerard Deledalle, 2001 (Deledalle, a French philosopher who did much to bring CSP to Europe's attention, just died a few months back).  Like having a Fodor's to the CSP wilderness (I think WP would have loved to have had this book)

I find it striking how different research is today because of the web vs. when Percy was working this a little over a decade ago (per Ketner's Thief of Peirce dialogues).  Also, a lot of work has been done in this area since his death.

re the third question:  I dunno?  I'd be interested if you do find the reference.  I have on occasion started to look up Langer's work but came away with the impression that she had drifted so far off in less Pe*rc*an directions that aren't of particular interest to me that I've never followed through on what it was that Percy was fond of in Langer's work wrt CSP's legacy.


Best,
Mike


At 03:24 PM 8/15/2003 -0400, you wrote:

No -- I'm certainly no moderator!  But I am fascinated by the fact that gays and Biblical authority have garnered so much response, but Percy's language theory doesn't get much interest?  There's so much he left unfinished and so much to investigate.  If he had lived longer, I think something tremendous might have come out of it -- like, the answer to, what is the interpretant?  He died before he could solve it.
 
So, here's what I would discuss if I had the choice...
 
What is the interpretant?
 
Why did he use triangles instead of triads, even when a good argument was given against it?
 
What did Susanne Langer drop that he picked up?  (I believe he says what it is in one place, but I lost it somewhere)
 
KP
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Parlin, Steven
To: 'Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion'
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 10:52 PM
Subject: RE: [percy-l] West Wing

Hmmm...

Because some of my replies that contradict Karey are not showing up in my
inbox, I assumed (wrongly it seems) that I had angered her (isn't she the
moderator?), and that she was preventing my postings from going to the list.


I owe you an all an apology...but especially Karey.

Please forgive my presumption.

I'm an ass. 

Steve



-----Original Message-----
From: David Alan Beck [mailto:dabeck AT iupui.edu]
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 9:45 PM
To: Percy-L: Literary and Philosophical Discussion
Subject: Re: [percy-l] West Wing


Steve,
Why are we getting triplicates of your posting??
-DB

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Parlin, Steven wrote:


  [NON-Text Body part not included]



David Beck                                        


--

An archive of all list discussion is available at
http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail

Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy
--

An archive of all list discussion is available at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail

Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy
--

An archive of all list discussion is available at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy/hypermail

Visit the Walker Percy Project at http://www.ibiblio.org/wpercy