Charles Sanders Peirce’s assessment of Hegel (2)

Internal anancasm, or logical groping, which advances upon a predestined line without being able to foresee whither it is to be carried nor to steer its course, this is the rule of development of philosophy. Hegel first made the world understand this; and he seeks to make logic not merely the subjective guide and monitor of thought, which was all it had been ambitioning before, but to be the vert mainspring of thinking, and not merely of individual thinking but of discussion, of the history of the development of thought, of all history, of all development.
Charles S. Peirce, 'Evolutionary Love' (1891), Chance, Love, and Logic: Philosophical Essays, edited and introduced by Morris R. Cohen, with an essay by John Dewey, introduction to the Bison Books Edition by Kenneth Laine Ketner, 1998, Univ. of Nebraska Press, p.294 (Reprint of 1923 ed. by Harcourt, Brace and World)

The truth is that pragmaticism is closely allied to the Hegelian absolute idealism, from which, however, it is sundered by its vigorous denial that the third category (which Hegel degrades to a mere stage of thinking) suffices to make the world, or is even so much as self-sufficient. Had Hegel, instead of regarding the first two stages with his smile of contempt, held on to them as independent or distinct elements of the triune Reality, pragmaticists might have looked up to him as the treat vindicator of their truth. (Of course, the external trappings of his doctrine are only here and there of much significance.) For pragmaticism belongs essentially to the triadic class of philosophical doctrines, and is much more essentially so than Hegelianism is. (Indeed, in one passage, at least, Hegel alludes to the triadic from his exposition as to a mere fashion of dress.) 
Charles S. Peirce, 'What Pragmatism Is' (1902), Selected Writings (Values in a Universe of Chance), edited, with an introduction and Notes by Phlip P. Weiner, 1966, Dover, p.202

　Just reading the above doesn’t make much sense. According to Shunpei Ueyama’s commentary in the Japanese edition of the anthology, the situation is as follows: When considering both the logical unfolding and the temporal development of a system, formal logic can describe only the logical unfolding. In formal logic, temporal development cannot, in principle, be described. And it seems that Hegel’s dialectic is valued as the descriptive logic for this latter aspect—the temporal development of a system.

※Please also refer to the following.
Two approaches to the Emergence

Two approaches to emergence

　Emergence refers to the behavior of a system that cannot be logically derived from the sum of the regular and simple behaviors of the elements that make up that system.

　When considering emergence, I believe there are two prominent approaches: “evolutionary theory” and “dialectics.”

１）The Theory of Evolution
　W. James interpreted the theoretical essence of evolutionary theory as follows.
　He stated that, in Darwinism, the two processes of “mutation” and “natural selection” are regarded as independent, unrelated phenomena. In other words, W. James understood Darwinism to be a theory that links two distinct types of change occurring in nature while keeping them separate.

２）Dialectics
　Peirce, the father of pragmatism and its greatest theorist, stated, “Even if it is dressed in strange garb, my philosophy is a revival of Hegelian philosophy.” It appears that Peirce valued dialectics as a methodological approach for describing the behavior of a system evolving over time. Furthermore, the pragmatist John Dewey was a Hegelian in his youth.

　Whether we are talking about “evolutionary theory” or “dialectics,” it is reasonable to expect that they share a deep theoretical affinity with pragmatism. Or rather, it seems possible to use pragmatism as a bridge to connect “evolutionary theory” and “dialectics” theoretically. Furthermore, my current prediction is that this could represent a significant breakthrough for contemporary systems theory.

[See] Our article below
The essence of Darwinism(Japanese Version)
Charles Sanders Peirce’s assessment of Hegel

Vergleichstabelle Poincaré / Bergson / Peirce

Bereitstellung von ChatGPT

Kategorie	Jules-Henri Poincaré (1854–1912)	Henri Bergson (1859–1941)	Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914)
Hauptwerke	La Science et l’hypothèse (1902); La Valeur de la Science (1905); Science et Méthode (1908)	Zeit und Freiheit (1889); Schöpferische Entwicklung (1907)	„The Fixation of Belief“ (1877); „How to Make Our Ideas Clear“ (1878)
Zentrales Interesse	Grundlagen von Mathematik und Physik; „Konventionalismus“ der Theoriewahl	Philosophie von Zeit, Leben und Intuition – Kritik am Mechanismus	Logik der Erkenntnis, Zeichentheorie und Fallibilismus
Erkenntnis-theoretische Position	Erfahrung leitet, aber determiniert Theorie nicht; Theorien werden nach Zweckmäßigkeit gewählt (pragmatischer Konstruktivismus)	Intuition erfasst den Fluss des Lebens; Zeit als schöpferische Dauer (durée)	Wissen als Kette fehlbarer Hypothesen; Wahrheit entsteht in gemeinschaftlicher Forschung
Wahrheits- begriff	Keine absolute Wahrheit, sondern „die vorteilhafteste Theorie“	Wahrheit als Prozess, nicht als statische Behauptung	Wahrheit als revidierbarer Glaubensbestand, offen für Korrektur
Erfahrungs-begriff	Erfahrung liefert Kontext, nicht Zwang, für die Theoriewahl	Erfahrung als Teilnahme am Lebensfluss, nicht analytisch sondern intuitiv	Erfahrung als experimentelles Feld; entwickelt sich durch Zeichen und Schlussfolgerung
Sicht der Erkenntnis-Evolution	Wissenschaftliche Erkenntnis entwickelt sich durch pragmatische Auswahl; Fitness = empirischer Erfolg	Bewusstsein entwickelt sich wie das Leben selbst schöpferisch	Erkenntnis entwickelt sich durch Versuch, Irrtum und Korrektur
Methodische Merkmale	Verbindung von mathematischer Strenge und philosophischer Reflexion	Intuitionismus und antimechanistischer Vitalismus	Integration von Semiotik, Logik und Pragmatismus
Geistiges Erbe	Neukantianismus, Konstruktivismus, Wissenschaftsphilosophie	Phänomenologie, Prozessphilosophie, Lebensphilosophie	Pragmatismus, Zeichentheorie, Analytische Philosophie, Kognitionswissenschaft
Bezug zu Ihrem Essay	Entspricht Ihrer These „Sprache als adaptives Interface“: Theorien als Anpassungsstrukturen	Dient als Gegenpol: „Leben vor der Sprache“ beleuchtet die sprachliche Grenze	Erweitert Ihr Thema durch „Sprache als System von Erkenntnis und Fehlerkorrektur“

Comparative Table: Poincaré / Bergson / Peirce

Provision of ChatGPT

Category	Jules-Henri Poincaré (1854–1912)	Henri Bergson (1859–1941)	Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914)
Major Works	La Science et l’hypothèse (1902); La Valeur de la Science (1905); Science et Méthode (1908)	Time and Free Will (1889); Creative Evolution (1907)	“The Fixation of Belief” (1877); “How to Make Our Ideas Clear” (1878)
Central Concern	Foundations of mathematics and physics; “conventionalism” in theory choice	Philosophy of time, life, and intuition (critique of mechanism)	Logic of inquiry, semiotics, and fallibilism
Epistemological Position	Experience guides but does not determine theory; theories are chosen for convenience and efficacy (pragmatic constructivism)	Intuition grasps the flow of life; time as creative duration (durée)	Knowledge is a chain of fallible hypotheses; truth emerges via communal inquiry
Concept of Truth	Not absolute truth but “the most advantageous theory”	Truth as process, not static proposition	Truth as revisable belief, open to correction
Concept of Experience	Experience provides context, not constraint, for theory selection	Experience as part of the living flow; participatory rather than analytical	Experience as experimental field for inquiry; evolves through signs and reasoning
View of Cognitive Evolution	Scientific knowledge evolves through pragmatic selection; fitness = empirical success	Consciousness evolves creatively, as life does	Knowledge evolves through trial, error, and correction
Methodological Feature	Fusion of mathematical rigor and philosophical reflection	Intuitionism and anti-mechanistic vitalism	Integration of semiotics, logic, and pragmatism
Intellectual Legacy	Neo-Kantianism, structuralism, philosophy of science	Phenomenology, process philosophy, vitalism	Pragmatism, semiotics, analytic philosophy, cognitive science
Connection to Your Essay	Resonates with your view of “language as adaptive interface”: theories as adaptive constructs	Serves as counterpoint: “life before language” illuminates the linguistic boundary	Extends your theme via “language as inquiry and error-correction system”

ポアンカレ／ベルグソン／パースの比較表

ChatGPT提供

項目	ジュール＝アンリ・ポアンカレ (Jules-Henri Poincaré, 1854–1912)	アンリ・ベルグソン (Henri Bergson, 1859–1941)	チャールズ・サンダース・パース (Charles Sanders Peirce, 1839–1914)
主著	『科学と仮説』（1902）『科学と方法』（1908）	『時間と自由意志』（1889）『創造的進化』（1907）	“The Fixation of Belief” (1877)“How to Make Our Ideas Clear” (1878)
中心関心	数学・物理学の基礎、理論選択の「慣習主義」	時間・生命・直観の哲学（機械論批判）	認識の論理・記号論・可謬主義（fallibilism）
認識論的立場	経験は理論を決定しない。理論は便宜性・有効性によって選択される（実用的構成主義）	知性ではなく「直観」によって生命の流れを捉える。時間は持続（durée）として創造的に展開	知識は誤りうる仮説的探究の連鎖。真理は探究共同体による漸進的合意
「真理」観	絶対的真理ではなく、「より有利な理論」	静的真理ではなく、生成的過程のうちにある真理	永久的確実性ではなく、改訂可能な信念体系
「経験」観	経験は理論選択を導くが、決定しない。経験＝選択の環境	経験は「生の流れ」に溶け込むもの。分析より直観的参与	経験は探究と試行の場。記号的推論を通じて進化する
「認識の進化」観	科学理論は便宜性により進化する。選択圧＝経験的成功	生命が進化するように、意識も創造的に進化	探究過程としての進化。誤謬と修正を通じて知識が深化
方法論的特徴	数理的構造と哲学的省察の融合	直観主義・反機械論的生命哲学	記号論的論理と実用主義の統合
思想的影響	ネオカント主義、構成主義、科学哲学	現象学、プロセス哲学、生命哲学	実用主義、記号論、分析哲学、認知科学
あなたのエッセイとの接点	「言葉＝環境適応インターフェイス」論に通じる：理論は環境への適応構造	「言葉以前の生命的持続」との対比によって、言語の境界を照らす	探究過程としての言語＝誤謬修正システム、という視点に連なる

Kimura Bin, "Il sé come confine", 1997

Fonte del titolo del saggio: "Gendai Shi Techo", maggio 1997, vol. 40, n. 5, pp. 26-30, speciale "Ecrittura di confine".

Questo saggio non è incluso nel libro di Bin Kimura. Pertanto, l'unico modo per leggere questo saggio intellettualmente interessante di Kimura è quello di recarsi in una biblioteca e sfogliare i numeri arretrati della rivista, oppure acquistare la vecchia rivista stessa in una libreria di seconda mano. Se non mi fossi abbonato a questa rivista minore, non avrei mai saputo della sua esistenza. Sono venuta a conoscenza di questo saggio per puro caso, perché l'ho letto al lavoro nel National Centre Test for University Entrance Examinations 2012 (giapponese) (ma in versione semplificata). È estremamente triste vederlo sepolto, quindi lo pubblico qui per intero, dato che si tratta di un articolo di rivista di 30 anni fa, e rispetterò le richieste di rimozione ricevute dai detentori del copyright.

I miei commenti su questo saggio sono vari. Mach bands and identity", "Boundaries and the W.James fringe", "Ortega and me/my environment", ecc. Nessuno di questi può essere scritto in pochi minuti, quindi farò del mio meglio per pubblicarli durante le vacanze di Capodanno. Per ora, pubblicherò questo saggio prima della fine dell'anno.

続きを読む "Kimura Bin, "Il sé come confine", 1997"

木村敏，《作为边界的自我》，1997 年

标题文章来源：《現代詩手帖》，1997 年 5 月，第 40 卷，第 5 期，第 26-30 页，"Boundary Ecriture "特辑。

木村敏的书中没有收录这篇文章。 因此，要想读到木村这篇充满智慧的文章，唯一的办法就是去图书馆翻阅杂志的过刊，或者去二手书店购买旧杂志。 如果我当初没有订阅这本小杂志，我永远不会知道它的存在。 我知道这篇文章完全是一个偶然，因为我在工作中读到了 2012 年全国大学入学考试中心测试（日语）中的这篇文章（不过是简化版）。 看到这篇文章被埋没，我感到非常难过，因此我将其全文发布在这里，因为这是一篇 30 年前的杂志文章，如果版权持有者提出删除要求，我将遵从。

我对这篇文章的评论多种多样。 如 "乐队与身份"、"边界与 W.James 边缘"、"奥尔特加与我/我的环境 "等，都不是几分钟能写完的，我将尽我所能在新年假期期间发表。 现在，我将在年底前发表这篇文章。

続きを読む "木村敏，《作为边界的自我》，1997 年"

Kimura Bin, "Le moi comme frontière", 1997

Source de l'essai : "Gendai Shi Techo", mai 1997, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 26-30, rubrique spéciale "Boundary Ecriture".

Cet essai n'est pas inclus dans le livre de Bin Kimura. Par conséquent, le seul moyen de lire cet essai intellectuellement intéressant de Kimura est de se rendre dans une bibliothèque et de consulter les anciens numéros du magazine, ou d'acheter le vieux magazine lui-même dans une librairie d'occasion. Si je n'avais pas été abonné à ce petit magazine, je n'en aurais jamais connu l'existence. J'ai pris connaissance de cet essai tout à fait par hasard, en le lisant au travail dans le National Centre Test for University Entrance Examinations (japonais) de 2012 (mais dans une version simplifiée). Il est extrêmement triste de le voir enterré, c'est pourquoi je le publie ici dans son intégralité, car il s'agit d'un article de magazine vieux de 30 ans, et je me conformerai à toute demande de retrait reçue de la part des détenteurs de droits d'auteur.

Mes commentaires sur cet essai sont variés. Mach bands and identity", "Boundaries and the W.James fringe", "Ortega and me/my environment", etc. Aucun d'entre eux ne peut être écrit en quelques minutes, et je ferai donc de mon mieux pour les publier pendant les vacances de fin d'année. Pour l'instant, je publierai cet essai avant la fin de l'année.

続きを読む "Kimura Bin, "Le moi comme frontière", 1997"

Kimura Bin, "El yo como límite", 1997

Fuente del ensayo del título: "Gendai Shi Techo", mayo de 1997, vol. 40, nº 5, pp. 26-30, especial "Boundary Ecriture".

Este ensayo no está incluido en el libro de Bin Kimura. Por lo tanto, la única forma de leer este ensayo intelectualmente interesante de Kimura es acudir a una biblioteca y hojear los números atrasados de la revista, o comprar la propia revista antigua en una librería de segunda mano. Si no me hubiera suscrito a esta revista menor, nunca habría sabido de su existencia. Conocí este ensayo totalmente por casualidad, ya que lo leí en el trabajo en la Prueba del Centro Nacional para los Exámenes de Acceso a la Universidad de 2012 (en japonés) (pero en versión simplificada). Es sumamente triste verlo enterrado, por lo que lo publico aquí íntegro, ya que se trata de un artículo de revista de hace 30 años, y atenderé cualquier reclamación de retirada que reciba de los titulares de los derechos de autor.

Mis comentarios sobre este ensayo son variados. Mach bands and identity', 'Boundaries and the W.James fringe', 'Ortega and me/my environment', etc. Sobre ninguno de ellos se puede escribir en unos minutos, así que haré lo posible por publicarlos durante las vacaciones de Año Nuevo. De momento, publicaré este ensayo antes de que acabe el año.

続きを読む "Kimura Bin, "El yo como límite", 1997"

Kimura Bin, The self as boundary,1997

Source of the title piece: "Gendai shi techo," May 1997, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 26-30, special feature "Boundary ecriture.

This essay is not included in the book by Bin Kimura. Therefore, the only way to read this intellectually interesting essay by Kimura is to go to the library and look through the back issues of the magazine, or to buy the old magazine itself at a second-hand bookshop. If I had not subscribed to this minor magazine in the first place, I would never have known of its existence. I came to know about this essay entirely by chance, as I read it at work in the 2012 National Centre Test for University Entrance Examinations (Japanese) (but in a simplified version). It is extremely sad to see it buried, so I am posting it here in full, as it is a 30-year-old magazine article, and I will comply with any removal claims received from copyright holders.

My comments on this essay are varied. 'Mach bands and identity', 'Boundaries and the W.James fringe', 'Ortega and me/my environment', etc. None of them can be written about in a few minutes, so I'll do my best to post any of them during the New Year holidays. For now, I will post this essay before the end of the year.

続きを読む "Kimura Bin, The self as boundary,1997"