Re: The Unmet Challenge of Peirce’s Work

KM = Kirsti Määttänen

KM: A brilliant way of finding analogies. I was truly impressed. --
     However, what I presented was not just an analogy. It was a
     metaphor. And a metaphor with telos.  Aiming at conveying a
     certain kind of understanding of the process involved in any
     worthwhile inquiry.

KM: For Peirce, metaphors are necessary in conveying ideas,
     and absolutely needed in conveying any new ideas.
     Be it your own future self, or any community
     of researchers.

KM: In metaphors, analogies are used, but a metaphor, being a third,
     cannot be reduced to analogical relations, which are dyadic.

Kirsti,

I wish everyone understood that as well as you express it here.
I personally regard analogies and metaphors as analogous to icons,
and thus akin to a degenerate species of symbols, but if you wish
to make telos and triadicity the marks that differentiate metaphor,
I could go along with that, at least, on a provisional basis, taking
meta phor a symbol of sorts.

Here are some notes I once collected on the analogy and inquiry
in Aristotle and Peirce, plus an assortment of related subjects:

http://mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey/Papers/Functional_Logic_:_Inquiry_and_Analogy

Regards,

Jon

-- 

academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache