[MD] Pirsig, James and Peirce

[Matt Kundert]

x,

You said:
I used the term "theory of meaning" to come close to what I think Peirce was 
getting at like "philosophology" I guess

Matt:
Insofar as we understand by "philosophology" "doing intellectual history," I 
have trouble understanding what you mean.  If we don't take Pirsig's term to 
mean that, an alternative you'll have to supply, then I probably have 
serious misgivings surrounding such a use (most of which are outlined in my 
Forum paper "Philosophologology").

And, insofar as Peirce was an original pragmatist, I'm sure there are many 
similarities to be gleaned from their respective views of science and such.  
Given that James didn't write a whole lot about science, Peirce and Pirsig 
probably do look superficially more similar.  Deeper than that is an open 
question I'm not sure I'd even want to take a stab at.

I don't talk a lot about Peirce because I don't know a lot about him.  
Rorty's not high on him, having studied him a lot way, way back, but he was 
probably over harsh when he said of Peirce, during his Presidential Address 
to the American Philosophical Association in '79, that his contribution to 
pragmatism was to merely have given it a name.  I doubt Rorty entirely meant 
it (he probably couldn't stand to pass up on a joke like that in front of 
such an audience), but more mainstream pragmatists, especially Peircians 
like Susan Haack, have never really forgiven him.

Matt

_________________________________________________________________
With tax season right around the corner, make sure to follow these few 
simple tips. 
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Taxes/PreparationTips/PreparationTips.aspx?icid=HMFebtagline