Peirce's Semiotics and the Future of Computing
Apparently Kenneth Ketner and Ralph Biel of Texas Tech's Institute for Studies in Pragmaticism have patented a new computer logic switch based on Charles Sanders Peirce's semiotics.
If you're not familiar with Peirce, you're missing out on the work of America's only great philosopher. Peirce is easy to read but difficult to understand, if you know what I mean. But he's eminently worth the effort. As for the works of Peirce himself...well, I suppose I'd recommend standards like "The Fixation of Belief" and "How to Make our Ideas Clear," though the former makes him sound like a meataxe psychologicist, which he most definitely was not. His theory of the logic of science seems to be, in essence, a Kantian deontological ethics of belief--or, perhaps more properly, ethics of inquiry.
As secondary-source introductions to his works, I like Sheriff's Charles Peirce's Guess at the Riddle and W.B. Gallie's Peirce and Pragmatism. By far the best advanced analysis of Peirce is, IMO, Richard Smyth's Reading Peirce Reading. It's also hard to go wrong with stuff by Joseph Ransdell.
Apparently Kenneth Ketner and Ralph Biel of Texas Tech's Institute for Studies in Pragmaticism have patented a new computer logic switch based on Charles Sanders Peirce's semiotics.
If you're not familiar with Peirce, you're missing out on the work of America's only great philosopher. Peirce is easy to read but difficult to understand, if you know what I mean. But he's eminently worth the effort. As for the works of Peirce himself...well, I suppose I'd recommend standards like "The Fixation of Belief" and "How to Make our Ideas Clear," though the former makes him sound like a meataxe psychologicist, which he most definitely was not. His theory of the logic of science seems to be, in essence, a Kantian deontological ethics of belief--or, perhaps more properly, ethics of inquiry.
As secondary-source introductions to his works, I like Sheriff's Charles Peirce's Guess at the Riddle and W.B. Gallie's Peirce and Pragmatism. By far the best advanced analysis of Peirce is, IMO, Richard Smyth's Reading Peirce Reading. It's also hard to go wrong with stuff by Joseph Ransdell.
posted by Winston Smith at
12:01 PM
4 Comments:
Sounds darned exciting. Can you suss it out for us non-Pearce scholars, WS?
I mean, I thought semiotics was a right-brain kinda thing. I don't have a clue on this.
Is John Rawls not considered a great philosopher? I am taking an entire class on him this quarter, and my Prof. seems to think he’s pretty good...
As one of Dick Smyth's students from long long ago, I am delighted to see that he's published something on his favorite philosopher!! It has to be good. He was the best perfesser I had. -B
Well, in the interest of full--or at least partial--disclosure, Smyth was one of my profs, too. But since my policy was basically to disbelieve almost everything any of my profs told me, the fact that I was his student and *still* think the book is great actually says something...
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home