Is Triadic Philosophy a track worth the traveling? Today I got a comment regarding the text noted below that said in part "Peirce's three categories as phenomenological bedrock has not been exploited, in my opinion ..." This seems to me to underline the possibility that by employing the terms Icon, Index and Symbol as the root and allowing our minds to supply what we muse to be relevant representations we can develop productive philosophy that addresses everyday issues triadically. This is somewhat like what I did initially after my jump to Reality, Ethics and Aesthetics as the three fundamental steps (Icon, Index, Symbol) of conscious thought in Triadic Philosophy. Taking anything as the reality, posing an ethical "blunt truth" and then moving to a suggestion of an aesthetic expression and/or action would fill (symbolize) the bill for a pedagogy based on this mode of thinking. The text that the comment above references is here:
Changing Your Heart and Mind: Triadic Philosophy in A Nut Shell http://buff.ly/1CijFgk
Now to put that colander to work. From where I sit these reflections are real and I have no idea why they remain so ineffably stable. The cords which hang from the building across the Broadway blow in the light wind. But these lights are as stable as the objects between me and the window.
I surmise that I can tolerate this miracle. My flexibility is such that I can regard it as real. It is part of vision and perception.
It helps to be able to take what one actually sees as part of reality. It would make me better able to empathize with any account of anyone else's perception. Even to honor it.
Democracy? All have a right to their visions without regard to their sophistication or even their truth. Acceptance is, in this sense, all.
Non-idolatry. We have been given the capacity to see things in ways unique to us but at the same time by sharing what we see we unearth commonalities and can arrive at the joy that the Holy One takes in recounting to Job the wonders of creation.
I then arrive at the threshold of the Third Aesthetic and I say to myself what Keats said - Truth is beauty. Beauty is truth. And I am impelled to EXPRESS this with the sentence Reality is beautiful.
And my action is to send this along in response to the notion that the first contains all the information, for it seems that the Second contains essential information. And that it is the Third - the aesthetic action - that contains the fruit of the entire consideration which is Triadic Philosophy.
One of the practices of Triadic Philosophy is to be sensitive to binary discourse. It crops up all over and academic venues are hardly immune to it. In fact we are all guilty, if you count it harmful to judge someone wrong and yourself right, with no qualification, no admission of fallibility and no betrayal of the possibility that it is pure enjoyment of the binary conflict that underlies much such discourse. Is it harmful really? I would say that when it becomes characterization, particularly negative characterization, it does carry with it a measure of harm. As I see Peirce - and I regard him as foundational as Harold Bloom regards Shakespeare - this is Peirce's world - it seems to me that he would have delighted in a triadic cast to discourse springing from his thought and that this cast would give a wide berth to the presence not only of fallibility but of mystery as what we do not yet know. When discourse becomes triadic that will be a cultural shift we can welcome as a product of CSP's influence.
Gluttony is a state of desiring to stuff oneself somehow. Who does that harm?
If it is a mere impulse, no one. If it is a prelude to obesity and beyond, it may harm the perpetrator and tangentally his friends. It may even be deadly.
But only when gluttony does result in harm is it evil. Merely to have a gluttonous thought is harmless.
It is not hard to imagine the results of gluttony through temptation to action to a sense of addiction — a formidable closing of ones freedom to determine one’s destiny. But even in one whose external circumstances are not optimal for the exercise of freedom, the main hope continues to lie in the freedom that remains within the inner space occupied by will and conscience and the values that determine the disposition of the heart.
When this freedom is evoked, one can reject a temptation and begin to imagine a different course. Our society would improve if this understanding underlay the mentality of those who are paid to counsel persons with harmful addictions. Nothing is more powerful than the will that is freely engaged in a beneficial act.