Abstract
Peirce’s semiotics is a formal doctrine of signs. As such, semiotics “would be concerned, in part, to determine the conditions for counting anything as true” (Liszka 1996: 2). Sometimes, semiotics is reduced to its first branch, speculative grammar, which concerns the classification of signs. However, critic and methodeutic are fundamental to guarantee the accuracy of the semiotic process. Critic gives “the conditions which determine the reasoning to be secure” (c.1902, CP 2.1) and methodeutic is the “study of the necessary conditions of the transmission of meaning by signs from mind to mind” (c.1897, CP 1.444). When we observe the system of sixty-six sign classes, we can find a method that provides confidence in the reasoning process. That means we can find classes of signs that represent critic and methodeutic in this system. The set of symbolic signs are the core of this process. In this paper, I will examine the interpretants of symbolic signs in order to describe the production of interpretants that increase the level of confidence in reasoning, contributing to the evolution of thought. The system of sixty-six sign classes provides a more complex set of interpretants, which might show the relation between the three branches of semiotics.
References
Bergman, Mats & Sami Paavola (eds.). 2014. The commens dictionary: Peirce’s terms in his own words. New Edition. http://www.commens.org/dictionary.Search in Google Scholar
Borges, Priscila. 2009. The sign tree: From sign structure to Peirce’s philosophy through reading a visual model of the 66 classes of signs. In Eero Tarasti (ed.), Communication: Understanding/misunderstanding – Proceedings of the 9th world congress of the international association for semiotic studies (IASS-AIS), vol. 2, 203–212. Helsinki: Acta Semiotica Fennica XXXIV.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 (Studies in Computational Intelligence 314), 221–237. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.10.1007/978-3-642-15223-8_12Search in Google Scholar
Borges, Priscila 2012. An application of Peirce’s 66 classes of signs. Paper presented at the Eleventh World Congress of the International Association for Semiotic Studies (IASS-AIS), October 5–9, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, China.Search in Google Scholar
Borges, Priscila. 2014. Experience and cognition in Peirce’s semiotics. American Journal of Semiotics 30(1–2). 1–26.10.5840/ajs2014301/21Search in Google Scholar
Colapietro, Vincent. 2009. Habit, competence, and purpose: How to make the grades of clarity clearly. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce 45(3). 348–377.10.2979/tra.2009.45.3.348Search in Google Scholar
Farias, Priscila & João Queiroz. 2003. On diagrams for Peirce’s 10, 28, and 66 classes of signs. Semiotica 147(1/4). 165–184.10.1515/semi.2003.089Search in Google Scholar
Farias, Priscila & João Queiroz. 2006. Images, diagrams, and metaphors: Hypoicons in the context of Peirce’s sixty-six-fold classification of signs. Semiotica 162(1/4). 287–307.10.1515/SEM.2006.081Search in Google Scholar
Liszka, James J. 1996. A general introduction to the semeiotic of Charles Sanders Peirce. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Merkle, Luiz Ernesto 2001. Disciplinary and semiotic relations across human-computer interaction. University of Western Ontario PhD dissertation.Search 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
Paavola, Sami. 2004. Abduction through grammar, critic, and methodeutic. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce 40(2). 245–270.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
Peirce, Charles S. 1931–1966. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, vol. 8. C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss & A. 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. 1982. Writings of Charles S. Peirce, vol. 6. M. Fisch, E. Moore & C. 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 S. 1992. Essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings, vol. 1, 1867–1893, N. Houser & C. 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. Essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings, vol. 2, 1893–1913, Peirce Edition Project (eds.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [Reference to vol. 2 of Essential Peirce will be designated EP 2.]Search in Google Scholar
Petrilli, Susan. 2009. Signifying and understanding: Reading the works of Victoria Welby and the signific movement. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110218510Search in Google Scholar
Pietarinen, Ahti-Veikko & Francesco Bellucci. 2014. New light on Peirce’s conceptions of retroduction, deduction, and scientific reasoning. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 28(4). 353–373.10.1080/02698595.2014.979667Search 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
Stjernfelt, Frederik. 2014. Natural propositions: The actuality of Peirce’s doctrine of dicisigns. Boston: Docent Press.10.1007/s11229-014-0406-5Search in Google Scholar
Weiss, Paul & Arthur Burks. 1945. Peirce’s sixty-six signs. Journal of Philosophy 42(14). 383–388.10.2307/2019195Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
