Re: Peirce and Physics

Re: Gary Fuhrman, Howard Pattee
At: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14753

Gary, Howard, List,

The critical question here is whether our conceptual framework (methods,
models, practices, theories, etc.) is adequate to a given domain of
phenomena and problems.

Naturalism being one of the few isms that I fess up to, I assume that
everything that happens is natural.  The question of reductionism is
not whether intellectual, mental, semiotic, or whatever phenomena
reduce to natural (physical, chemical, biological, etc.) laws
but whether they reduce to so-&-so's favorite natural laws.

Physics is rife with triadic relations because mathematics
is rife with triadic relations and so it is possible that
some of these relations may already be winners with regard
to affording models of processes that are adequate to the
rei of the semiotic domain, but I do not get the sense
that those potentially adequate resources are currently
being exploited to their full potential by people whose
pet models fall into the dyadic mold.

Regards,

Jon

-- 

academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache