Re: Kaina Stoicheia -- Rambling Review -- Discussion

JA = Jon Awbrey
KM = Kirsti Määttänen

JA: Signs are about objects, in every sense of the word “pragmata”, and
     Peirce was about the same pragmata that he arranged his signs about.

JA: I believe it's true that fixating on signs in isolation from their objects
     and interpretants, along with fixating on single triples in isolation from
     the triadic sign relations in which they take their place as elements, are
     the main obstacles that keep would-be understanders of Peirce's signs from
     getting off the ground when they seek to apply Peirce's theory of signs to
     significant practical objects.  It is my object to do something about that.

KM: I fully agree with you and am most keen to see what you'll do about that.

KM: Still, in the very act of saying, or writing the word "sign", you
     have (already) taken it as on object, i.e. you have objectified it.

Yes, it becomes the object of a "higher order sign" in a "higher order sign relation".
This is one of the semiotic operations that I had to treat in some detail in my work
on the reflective capacities of inquiry driven systems.

I posted a link to that work in another thread --

http://mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry_Driven_Systems_:_Part_6#6.9._Higher_Order_Sign_Relations_:_Introduction

I'm afraid I fell prey to that annoying Peircean habit of trying to classify
the various species of higher order signs that arose in this work, complete
with neologisms and acronyms, but I'm sure better ways of dealing with the
subject will eventually arise.

KM: In interpreting a sign, it becomes subjectified as meaning,
     in a more or less vague sense, in one way or another.

When we interpret signs we may do one or all of these things:

(1) We create interpretant signs in our own minds
     that are more or less subjective to ourselves.

(2) We may create interpretant signs in common media
     that others may observe and possibly interpret.

(3) We may refer the initial signs and the interpretant signs to
     objects of our own acquaintance that we more or less intend
     to be more or less the same as the initial signers' objects
     in producing their initial signs.

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