ONT Re: Inquiry Driven Systems
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
the theory of cognitive dissonance tells me that if i went through all
this trouble to set up interpretive and objective frameworks that i
must believe they are good for something, so what might that be?
let me revert to a classical example, dressed up a bit,
but solely for the sake of a minor entertainment value:
let's say that i am taken to the circus as a child
and i see a juggler in one of the rings that makes
such an impression on my impassionable mind that i
conceive a heartfelt desire then and there to grow
up and be a juggler someday. so i keep this image
of a juggler in my mind, or what is more likely, a
symbolic derivative of it, for many a dormant year
until there should come by chance or design a time
when i can do something about it, or choose not to
do so. here is how the picture may be cast so far:
o-----------------------------o-----------------------------o
| Objective Framework | Interpretive Framework |
o-----------------------------o-----------------------------o
| |
| s = symbolic derivative |
| / |
| / |
| / |
| juggling act o <------------@ |
| \ |
| \ |
| \ |
| i = image or impression |
| |
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
this picture compresses a lot of information into a tiny space,
so let me develop and elaborate some of the implications of it.
the figure shows one element of a sign relation, in effect,
one 3-ple of the form <o, s, i>, where the object o is just
the juggling act that we are presently imagining was seen by
me as a child, where the interpretant sign i is the initial
image impressed in my mind at the imaginary time in question,
and where the sign s is a symbolic derivative of this first
impression of the object, and so a signal memory that remains
in my imagination of the juggling act initially seen, so long
ago in this imaginary time.
that is as close as i can imagine getting to what an incipient element
or a nascent moment of a primary sign relation might be like, and it's
pretty much just a copy of aristotle's picture, like i discuss in this:
http://www.chss.montclair.edu/inquiry/fall95/awbrey.html
http://www.shss.montclair.edu/inquiry/fall95/awbrey.html
viewed after the fact, however, the three facets of the elemental
sign relation appear to take on a multiplicty of different senses.
in this case, i am so impressed by the objective performance that
i conceive a desire to emulate it in the shapes of my own conduct.
so the object o becomes an objective o, that is, an aim or an end.
more carefully said, it becomes an exemplar of a class of actions,
the like of which i would like to be able to accomplish in my own
right, embodied in forms of my own future practice or performance.
now, the pragmatic model of sign relations is especially designed
for the sake of integrating, or re-integrating, the disintegrated
facets of pragmatic objects, pathematic ideas, and symbolic signs
that commonly arise in just these sorts or situations, as present
in the example before us. in effect, the pragmatic angle on such
a case is deliberately intended to facilitate the very conversion
that is called for here, that allows us to recover the relations
of objects to our active experiential orientations toward them.
one of the ways that the pragmatic theory of sign relations achieves
this amazing feat is by recognizing the way that our action, behavior,
conduct, or even just our disposition to action can function as another
brand of interpretants for signs, with respect to an object or objective.
in our case, this makes fairly short shrift of the following conversion,
whereby i am able to turn the impressed image into an imaginary action
on my own behalf, and thenceforward, if i can find the means whereby,
into a schedule for its implementation. in this scheme, the object o'
is an objective that is yet to be achieved at some indeterminate point
in the future, the interpretant i' is an indication of the immensity
of inchoate imagery, interpretive imitation, iterative improvisation,
and incremental implemenation that is typically required to emulate
a performance with any repectable quality of virtuosity, and the
schematic sign s is the only potential quasi-invariant of the
entire conative and conceivably life-long struggle to juggle.
o-----------------------------o-----------------------------o
| Objective Framework | Interpretive Framework |
o-----------------------------o-----------------------------o
| |
| s = symbolic derivative |
| / |
| / |
| / |
| juggling act o'<------------@ |
| \ |
| \ |
| \ |
| i' = implemented imagery |
| |
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
just another random thought,
to be continued willy nilly,
jon awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤