The collection presents a variety of promising new directions in Royce scholarship from an international group of scholars, including historical reinterpretations, explorations of Royce's ethics of loyalty and religious philosophy, and contemporary applications of his ideas in psychology, the problem of reference, neo-pragmatism, and literary aesthetics.
My intention in this paper is to contribute the debate on “realism” in order to raise a different sort of question: not whether ‘reality’ exists or does not exist, but rather what effects does the belief in this or that reality produce (as Peirce put it 150 years ago). I will turn to Eco’s later thought, and to his support for a form of ‘negative’ realism, and try to demonstrate how his appeal to Peirce’s distinction between Immediate and Dynamical Object (...) is affected by a common-sense interpretation of what ‘real’ amounts to. Peirce in fact distinguished between the “existence” of facts and their “reality.” The former implies a dynamic of blind force, a dynamical reaction. Yet, “reality consists in the future” (CP 8.284), in the public recognition of what it always will be, or we hope will be, in the long run (Peirce uses the word “mellonization”). In Eco’s work, though, the Being or the Real, seen as pure Something, is understood after the form of a Thing, above all External, which simply says many ‘No’s. Peirce’s pragmaticism leads us further on, concentrating on the concept of habit that is also detectable in Eco’s analysis. We could say that Peirce distinguishes brute existence hic et nunc from the persistence of habits. Acts and dispositions to act, and not facts (as opposed to interpretations) appear as real; and it is in this respect that I think we can find a promising line of research for better explaining Eco’s theory of realism. (shrink)
Eu inicio por introduzir algumas citações que Peirce faz sobre Espinosa. Poucos, mas importantes comentários, sugerem que uma nova consideração da “essência” filosófica pode emergir dessa análise. Conforme lemos na Ética de Espinosa, essência não deve ser considerado como forma pura; tampouco é uma qualificação definida com designações rígidas. Significado é potência: em termos pragmáticos, como buscarei demonstrar, o poder de estar pronto para agir, expandindo a própria disposição para responder, encarnando dado hábito de modo eficaz. Assim, não procede que (...) o significado é, de modo acabado e de uma vez por todas. Antes, este se faz na medida em que é capaz de produzir novos efeitos. Como disse Espinosa, é uma potentia agendium conatusinexaurível que sempre produz uma prontidão para perseverar na ação. Conceitos são mensuráveis à luz de seus resultados: expandem seus efeitos como uma floresta, ou onda, sem uma fronteira ou limite claros. Nossa concepção desses efeitos é o todo de nossa concepção do objeto, diz a máxima pragmática. Significado implica um vasto oceano de consequências inesperadas, Peirce escreve. Em termos espinosistas: ninguém sabe até onde chega o poder da mente – ou do corpo. Lançarei mão de algumas sugestões de Giorgio Agamben e Gilles Deleuze a este respeito, construindo sobre eles para abordar a ética de Espinosa em termos pragmáticos e o pragmatismo numa forma espinosista. (shrink)
In queste note parto dal commento di alcuni passaggi dell'ultimo Foucault per proporre un'interpretazione della vita come materia di lavoro, in base alla quale costruire il proprio ethos, nella doppia valenza di daimon singolare e di condotta condivisa. Ciò può condurre a tornare all'idea antica del bios philosophikos, rivista alla luce di un materialismo dell'incorporeo.
It is not always easy to explain what it means to think in a pragmatist way. Is it simply a way of looking at practical, everyday life matters from a philosophical standpoint? Is it a way of thinking that belongs to a precise theoric movement, as lofty and profound as, for example, the phenomenological or neo-positivistic ones? What distinguishes the pragmatist way of philosophizing? James addresses this question by clarifying that pragmatism is not a doctrine, but an attitude, a tendency (...) to reason in a certain way. Peirce characterizes it as a method to make our ideas clear and produce stable beliefs. According to pragmatists, the meaning of any conception should not be treated as an abstract notion. It should be... (shrink)
The subject of this book is the thought of the American pragmatist and founder of semiotics, Charles Sanders Peirce. The book collects the papers presented to the International Conference Semiotics and Philosophy in C.S. Peirce (Milan, April 2005), together with some additional new contributions by well-known Peirce scholars, bearing witness to the vigour of Peircean scholarship in Italy and also hosting some of the most significant international voices on this topic. The book is introduced by the two editors and is (...) divided into three sections, corresponding to the three main areas of the most interesting contemporary reflection on Peirce. Namely, Semiotics and the Logic of Inquiry (part I); Abduction and Philosophy of Mathematics (part II); Peirce and the Western Tradition. (part III). The analysis is carried out from a semiotic perspective, in which semiotics should not be understood as a specific doctrine but rather as the philosophical core of Peirce’s system. As we read in the introduction: “it is semiotics and philosophy or, rather, semiotics as philosophy and philosophy as semiotics, which emerge from a reading of these papers”. (shrink)
The essay compares the Socratic idea of an infinite inquiry, considered as the moving inspiration of philosophy and the idea, analyzed in contemporary epoch especially by Peirce and Wittgenstein, of a knowledge based on the pure description of life and its pragmatic forms, of the indubitable certainty that is the ground of any evidence, acquired through a rigorous zetetics. Here the inquiry is: how can we configure the philosophical method – meth’odos, path – in the intertwinement between lived life and (...) examined life? (shrink)
I will sustain in this article that Peirce can be seen as the last great representative of that inconspicuous but persistent tradition that, from the thirteenth to the seventeenth century, spent its energies on discovering a universal language. His project of Existential Graphs is in fact grounded on the isomorphism among a Sheet of Assertion, in which Graphs-signs are drawn, a Mind, with its thoughts-signs, and the Universe, with its facts-signs. In the same sense, Leibniz worked on his Characteristica Universalis, (...) seen as a general Encyclopedia or alphabet of human thoughts, and a pictum mundi amphitheatrum. (shrink)