Profundity is spicy ambiguity.
Show this thread
-
Note: this was in the period when Peirce was still taking seriously the idea that semiosis continued infinitely and doesn't have natural ends. His later thought seems to have differed on this. So... some conclusions can probably be definitive without resort to vagueness.
Pierce is a good person to be reminded of - how does he distinguish vagueness from ambiguity?
-
-
He doesn't, but given his stuff about continua, I'd guess that he would put ambiguity on a continuum from determinate to indeterminate, nearish "determinate."
-
His approach would turn on the pursuit of the art of perfectly signifying - his "logic of vagueness." Starting assumption: nothing is absolutely determinate, and so on ontological troubles is not perfectly knowable, even if our science was perfect.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.