[Index] [Prev] [Next]

Comments to Semios-L

Steven Skaggs :
Re: TUT: SIGN;
Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:14:14 -0400

Katya,
>
>If this sounds reasonable, the peircian chain may be approached as
>sr -> sd/sr ->sd meaning that any signified, can in turn function as
>signifier. And here, wow, I think we may find what I lost two paragraphs
>ago in the quantum metaphor: indeed there is an interchangeable sd/sr
>state. Not in the sense that denies the sd as an effect of sr, but in the
>sense that any specific sign may take the form of either sr or sd, that a
>sd may be in turn sr in another relation.
>And this model gets the dynamic dimension so explicit in Peirce (lacking in
>Saussure).
>

Isn't this a valuable medium for those of us who enjoy thinking on the fly...
it is almost as if we think our own thoughts in typescript, wait a couple
hours , and get back a little voice criticising or affirming our prior
actions....and just occasionally we get these flashes of insight.

Katya, there is much to chew on in your post and as usual I find our debate
most engaging.

The hour is late (10:30 here in Kentucky, USA). Tomorrow expect more.

>Katya Mandoki
>
>P.S. Yes, Steve, I just tried to contact Joe.

Great, hope he joins in.

sxs
_____________
Steven Skaggs

>> McCarthy: "Even machines as simple as thermostats can be said to have
>>beliefs."
<< Searle: "What beliefs does your thermostat have?"
>> McCarthy: "My thermostat has three beliefs - it is too hot in here, it
>>is too cold in here, and it is just right in here."

[Index] [Prev] [Next]

Comments to Semios-L