ONT Re: Tone, Token, Type
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
| So then, a natural class being a family whose members are the sole
| offspring and vehicles of one idea, from which they derive their
| peculiar faculty, to classify by abstract definitions is simply
| a sure means of avoiding a natural classification. I am not
| decrying definitions. I have a lively sense of their great
| value in science. I only say that it should not be by means
| of definitions that one should seek to find natural classes.
| When the classes have been found, then it is proper to try to
| define them; and one may even, with great caution and reserve,
| allow the definitions to lead us to turn back and see whether
| our classes ought not to have their boundaries differently
| drawn. After all, boundary lines in some cases can only be
| artificial, although the classes are natural, as we saw in
| the case of the 'kets'. When one can lay one's finger upon
| the purpose to which a class of things owes its origin, then
| indeed abstract definition may formulate that purpose. But
| when one cannot do that, but one can trace the genesis of a
| class and ascertain how several have been derived by different
| lines of descent from one less specialized form, this is the
| best route toward an understanding of what the natural classes
| are. This is true even in biology; it is much more clearly so
| when the objects generated are, like sciences, themselves of the
| nature of ideas.
|
| Charles Sanders Peirce, 'Collected Papers', CP 1.222.
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o