WHAT GIVES?

Triadic Philosophy Says Consciousness Is Logical

Books KU/KOLL

Twitter

Bio

Goodbye, Charles. This is not the end. But today we diverge.

Reading Peirce’s note below, you will find that consciousness is not regarded as intrinsic to logic. Knowledge and inference are. But not consciousness.

Triadic Philosophy holds that consciousness is the condition under which logic can function.

Logic tells us things we need to be aware of consciously and it is from the process of allowing inferences to become acts and expressions that we arrive at history, progress, what we say and do.

Sorry, Charles.

The problem is actually one of definition.

Peirce says consciousness is the feeling of the passing instant. I say such a feeling is a whissshhh. Or whatever you come up with to say the same thing.

A passing feeling has nothing to do with consciousness. Consciousness has to do with the thoughtful state your will helps you create as it (consciousness) enables you to see a sign, name it, consider in the face of obstacles like ethical constraints (or prompts), and then moves you knowingly (consciously) to a stage that evokes truth and beauty.

Pause for breath.

Remain conscious.

Now we imagine a conversation and finally think of an expression or an act or both. These are the aesthetic outputs of our conscious journey through Reality, Ethics and Aesthetics.

Really!

This is not something Reason does on its own. Consciousness is close to ontological, close to what we call a soul. Consciousness is us in a state of awareness, a state of reasonability, a state of sufficient peace to enable thought.

Peirce is not making a passing error here. He ends his diss with a coup de grace.

If you follow the text below you will see the poor Triadic Philosopher skewered as a hedonist.

Pray tell!

I am not sure that is a bad designation. What does it mean?

Whoops.

Peirce says “hedonism in ethics.”

All for assuming the existence of consciousness seen as described above?

I shall be alert in future installments to the trajectory of this insult. Perhaps there is something I am not seeing. All I can say is that I have been brought up short.

But the edifice of Triadic Philosophy has not fallen down.

We shall see.

Peirce: CP 2.66 Cross-Ref:††

66. Logic is obliged to suppose (it need not assert) that there is knowledge embodied in some form, and that there is inference, in the sense that one embodiment of knowledge affects another. It is not obliged even so much as to … suppose that there is consciousness. Descartes was of opinion that animals were unconscious automata. He might as well have thought that all men but himself were unconscious. To suppose them so does not annul the rules of logic. It still remains true that such and such a habit of determining one virtual store of knowledge by another will result in the concentration of actions so as to bring about definite ends. The essence of rationality lies in the fact that the rational being will act so as to attain certain ends. Prevent his doing so in one way, and he will act in some utterly different way which will produce the same result. Rationality is being governed by final causes. Consciousness, the feeling of the passing instant, has, as such, no room for rationality. The notion that logic is in any way concerned with it is a fallacy closely allied to hedonism in ethics.†1