Home
CP 2.66. "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."
Descartes aside, Peirce cleaves to his understanding of consciousness as nothing but feeling. One might differ in accepting Peirce's conclusion that feelings are not involved in the achievement of rational results. I would be more inclined to think that the achievement of a rational. ethical end results from triadic thought. Triadic thinking does not divorce feeling from mind. It sees heart and mind as one. If division exists we make it so.
Logic is the attainment of a result that is ontologically good. It is a quality of thought. It is conscience applied to the making of choices. It is all subsumed in the evolution of life which is the direction of consciousness as the ocean of feeling which contains all.
Perhaps I can clarify this by suggesting that racial justice, the attainment of loving community among human beings of different races,
is both logical -- good on the face of it -- and a mandate of conscience, a prod to action, the product of will, directed by heart and mind unified.
It is clearly a rational aim and it most certainly is the presence within consciousness which is the sum of every intention related to the end.
The result of a conscious process dealing with this is a progressive consensus based on evolving expressions and actions.
In Peircean terms the end of pragmaticism is logical, rational and the necessary result of conscious (felt) processes.
Descartes aside, Peirce cleaves to his understanding of consciousness as nothing but feeling. One might differ in accepting Peirce's conclusion that feelings are not involved in the achievement of rational results. I would be more inclined to think that the achievement of a rational. ethical end results from triadic thought. Triadic thinking does not divorce feeling from mind. It sees heart and mind as one. If division exists we make it so.
Logic is the attainment of a result that is ontologically good. It is a quality of thought. It is conscience applied to the making of choices. It is all subsumed in the evolution of life which is the direction of consciousness as the ocean of feeling which contains all.
Perhaps I can clarify this by suggesting that racial justice, the attainment of loving community among human beings of different races,
is both logical -- good on the face of it -- and a mandate of conscience, a prod to action, the product of will, directed by heart and mind unified.
It is clearly a rational aim and it most certainly is the presence within consciousness which is the sum of every intention related to the end.
The result of a conscious process dealing with this is a progressive consensus based on evolving expressions and actions.
In Peircean terms the end of pragmaticism is logical, rational and the necessary result of conscious (felt) processes.
