Abstract
The issue of the ordering of the ten trichotomies is one among the many questions still open regarding Peirce’s extended theory of signs. A proper decision regarding the order of the ten trichotomies demands a discussion of the entire semiotic process. The aim of this paper is to discuss the order of the trichotomies related to the mode of being of the immediate and dynamical objects. Therefore, it addresses only one part of this process, which concerns the relationship between the sign and its objects. When subdividing the object, Peirce begins to consider the immediate and the dynamic objects as trichotomies, that is, aspects to be considered in the definition of the classes of signs. The introduction of these two trichotomies brings in a problem: how to order them in the system of ten trichotomies. Diverging opinions regarding this ordering are found in Peirce’s texts, and in his commentators. We will investigate this problem by seeking a sort of pragmatic clarification of the matter, presenting a reflection about the philosophical and semiotic consequences of the different proposals for the ordering of these trichotomies. Placing the dynamic object after the sign may even help to explain the functioning of fictional signs, but is this coherent with Peirce’s philosophy? On the other hand, would it be possible to talk about lying signs if every object was determined by its own sign?
Funding source: UEMG's PQ/UEMG program (Juliana Rocha Franco)
Funding source: Proap, PPGCOM/FAC (Priscila Borges)
-
Research funding: Priscila Borges is a researcher supported by Proap, PPGCOM/FAC and Juliana Rocha Franco is a researcher supported by UEMG’s PQ/UEMG program.
References
Bellucci, Francesco. 2018. Peirce’s speculative grammar: Logic as semiotics. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315211008Search in Google Scholar
Borges, Priscila. 2009. The sign tree: Peirce’s philosophy through a visual model of the 66 classes of signs. In Eero Tarasti, Paul, Forsell & Richard Littlefield (eds.), Communication: Understanding/misunderstanding (Acta Semiotica Fennica 34), vol. 1, 203–212. Tartu: Greif.Search in Google Scholar
Borges, Priscila. 2010. A visual model of Peirce’s 66 classes of signs unravels his late proposal of enlarging semiotic theory. In Lorenzo Magnani, Walter, Carnielli & Claudio Pizzi (eds.), Model-based reasoning in science and technology: Abduction, logic, and computational discovery, 221–237. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-15223-8_12Search in Google Scholar
Borges, Priscila & Juliana Rocha Franco. 2022. Indeterminacy and final causation in the process of sign determination. Cognitio 23(1). 1–14. https://doi.org/10.23925/2316-5278.2022v23i1:e59925.10.23925/2316-5278.2022v23i1:e59925Search in Google Scholar
Farias, Priscila & Joao Queiroz. 2003. On diagrams for Peirce’s 10, 28, and 66 classes of signs. Semiotica 147(1/4). 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.2003.089.Search in Google Scholar
Flórez Restrepo, Jorge & Juliana Acosta López de Mesa. 2021. A new approach to the problem of the order of the ten trichotomies and the classification of sixty-six types of signs in Peirce’s late speculative grammar. Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society 57(3). 374–396. https://doi.org/10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.57.3.05.Search in Google Scholar
Jappy, Anthony. 2017. Peirce’s twenty-eight classes of signs and the philosophy of representation: Rhetoric, interpretation, and hexadic semiosis. London: Bloomsbury.10.5040/9781474264860Search in Google Scholar
Lieb, Irwin C. 1977. On Peirce’s classification of signs. In Charles Hardwick (ed.), Semiotics and Significance: The correspondence between Charles S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby, 160–166. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Magnani, Lorenzo. 2007. Morality in a technological world: Knowledge as duty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511498657Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Ralf. 1994. On the principles of construction and the order of Peirce’s trichotomies of signs. Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society 30(1). 135–153.Search in Google Scholar
Parker, Kelly. 1998. The continuity of Peirce’s thought. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1931–1966. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, 8 vols., Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss & Arthur W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Reference to Peirce’s papers will be designated CP followed by volume and paragraph number.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1967. Manuscripts in the Houghton Library of Harvard University, as identified by Richard Robin, Annotated catalogue of the Papers of Charles S. Peirce. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. [Reference to Peirce’s manuscripts will be designated MS or L.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1992 (1867–1893). Essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings, vol. 1, Nathan Houser & Christian Kloesel (eds.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [Reference to vol. 1 of Essential Peirce will be designated EP 1.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1998 (1893–1913). Essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings, 2 vols., Peirce Edition Project (eds.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [Reference to vol. 2 of Essential Peirce will be designated EP 2.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1982. Writings of Charles S. Peirce, 8 vols., Max Fisch, Edward Moore & Christian Kloesel (eds.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [Reference to Peirce’s writings will be designated W followed by volume and page number.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles & Lady Victoria Welby. 1977. Semiotic and significs. Charles S. Hardwick (ed.). Bloomington: Indianapolis University Press. [Reference to this work will be designated SS followed by page number.]Search in Google Scholar
Sanders, Gary. 1970. Peirce’s sixty-six signs? Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society 6(1). 3–16.Search in Google Scholar
Savan, David. 1977. Questions concerning certain classifications claimed for signs. Semiotica 19(3/4). 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1977.19.3-4.179.Search in Google Scholar
Savan, David. 1980. La séméiotique de Charles S. Peirce. Langages 14(58). 9–23. https://doi.org/10.3406/lgge.1980.1844.Search in Google Scholar
Weiss, Paul & Arthur Burks. 1945. Peirce’s sixty-six signs. The Journal of Philosophy 42(14). 383–388. https://doi.org/10.2307/2019195.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
