12,080
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Tuesday November 26, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchDirectory talk:Jon Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry Driven Systems : Part 5 (view source)
Revision as of 19:06, 21 September 2010
, 19:06, 21 September 2010→3.3. Reflection on Reflection: markup
# Finally, my reflections on these passages are designed to illustrate the variety of relations that occur between the POV of a writer, especially as it develops through time, and the POV of a reader, in the light of the ways that it deflects its own echoes through a text in order to detect the POV of the writer that led to its being formed in that manner.
# Finally, my reflections on these passages are designed to illustrate the variety of relations that occur between the POV of a writer, especially as it develops through time, and the POV of a reader, in the light of the ways that it deflects its own echoes through a text in order to detect the POV of the writer that led to its being formed in that manner.
The first excerpt appears in the form of a dictionary entry, intended as a definition of ''pragmatism''.
The first excerpt appears in the form of a dictionary entry,
intended as a definition of "pragmatism".
| Pragmatism. The opinion that metaphysics is to be largely cleared up
{| align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="90%"
|
|
|(Peirce, CP 5.2, 1878/1902).
<p>'''Pragmatism.''' The opinion that metaphysics is to be largely cleared up by the application of the following maxim for attaining clearness of apprehension: "Consider what effects, that might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to have. Then, our conception of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object."</p>
|-
| align="right" | (Peirce, CP 5.2, 1878/1902).
|}
The second excerpt presents another version of the "pragmatic maxim",
The second excerpt presents another version of the ''pragmatic maxim'', a recommendation about a way of clarifying meaning that can be taken to stake out the general POV of pragmatism.
a recommendation about a way of clarifying meaning that can be taken
to stake out the general POV of pragmatism.
| Pragmaticism was originally enounced in the form of a maxim, as follows:
{| align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="90%"
|
|
|(Peirce, CP 5.438, 1878/1905).
<p>Pragmaticism was originally enounced in the form of a maxim, as follows: Consider what effects that might conceivably have practical bearings you conceive the objects of your conception to have. Then, your conception of those effects is the whole of your conception of the object.</p>
|-
| align="right" | (Peirce, CP 5.438, 1878/1905).
|}
Over time, Peirce tried to express the basic idea
Over time, Peirce tried to express the basic idea contained in the ''pragmatic maxim'' (PM) in numerous different ways. In the remainder of this work, the gist of the pragmatic maxim, the logical content that appropriates its general intention over a variety of particular contexts, the common denominator of all of its versionary approximations, can be referred to with maximal simplicity as “PM”. Otherwise, subscripts can be used in contexts where it is necessary to mention a particular form, for instance, referring to the versions just given as “PM<sub>1</sub>” and “PM<sub>2</sub>”, respectively.
contained in the "pragmatic maxim" (PM) in numerous
different ways. In the remainder of this work, the
gist of the pragmatic maxim, the logical content that
appropriates its general intention over a variety of
particular contexts, the common denominator of all of
its versionary approximations, can be referred to with
maximal simplicity as "PM". Otherwise, subscripts can
be used in contexts where it is necessary to mention a
particular form, for instance, referring to the versions
just given as "PM_1" and "PM_2", respectively.
<pre>
Considered side by side like this, any perceptible differences between
Considered side by side like this, any perceptible differences between
PM_1 and PM_2 appear to be trivial and insignificant, lacking in every
PM_1 and PM_2 appear to be trivial and insignificant, lacking in every
