20 April 2006
Charles Sanders Peirce
The Essential Peirce, Volume 1
is a fantastic introduction to eminent American Philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. Peirce is both approachable and difficult, depending on the subject and audience he was writing for. He wrote enough ‘popular’ essays for periodicals of the time that a cogent yet clear picture emerges of his philosophy. His work on logic is more elusive, at least for me, but that is probably more a reflection on my lack of proper education. The Fixation of Belief, written in 1877, may warrant an entire Midwest Voices piece from yours truly. Briefly, Peirce argues that belief is our brain’s natural state, and that any period of uncertainty is uncomfortable and this irritation will be avoided at all costs. The method of filling in the blank, of ‘fixing belief’, is what is interesting. Peirce gives us four options, in increasing order of complexity.
The first is the method of tenacity, of simply clinging at all costs to the beliefs we already have. Peirce argues this method is ultimately untenable, as constant erosion of doubt will undermine the fixing of beliefs. The second method is for the individual to yield to the will of the state, or of the state imposing itself on its citizens. This could be religious or political oppression, and Peirce notes this method of inquiry is capable of immense works such as the Pyramids. A doctrinal approach fails, however, to regulate every subject. This means an opening will exist in any system for an inquiring, impious mind. The third method of settling belief is the a priori method or common sense in modern parlance. This method of inquiry seeks explanations that are naturally agreeable to reason. The problem, of course, is that we do not live in a common-sense world. Heavier objects do not fall faster than lighter ones. Euclid geometry and Newtonian physics break down upon further review. Further, what is reasonable today may not be tomorrow, and any method of seeking answers that waivers, subject to popular opinion will not be long lasting.
Peirce traces the failures of these methods in involving the inquirer. Peirce thought proper reasoning would not be dependent on the observer, that there is a reality independent of what humans would like to think. Peirce is arguing for the scientific method, that independent observers, performing repeatable tests, will arrive at the same conclusion. The answer may not be the one we sought, but exists nonetheless. I still have 300 words to go; this might be an article in June.
is a fantastic introduction to eminent American Philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. Peirce is both approachable and difficult, depending on the subject and audience he was writing for. He wrote enough ‘popular’ essays for periodicals of the time that a cogent yet clear picture emerges of his philosophy. His work on logic is more elusive, at least for me, but that is probably more a reflection on my lack of proper education. The Fixation of Belief, written in 1877, may warrant an entire Midwest Voices piece from yours truly. Briefly, Peirce argues that belief is our brain’s natural state, and that any period of uncertainty is uncomfortable and this irritation will be avoided at all costs. The method of filling in the blank, of ‘fixing belief’, is what is interesting. Peirce gives us four options, in increasing order of complexity.The first is the method of tenacity, of simply clinging at all costs to the beliefs we already have. Peirce argues this method is ultimately untenable, as constant erosion of doubt will undermine the fixing of beliefs. The second method is for the individual to yield to the will of the state, or of the state imposing itself on its citizens. This could be religious or political oppression, and Peirce notes this method of inquiry is capable of immense works such as the Pyramids. A doctrinal approach fails, however, to regulate every subject. This means an opening will exist in any system for an inquiring, impious mind. The third method of settling belief is the a priori method or common sense in modern parlance. This method of inquiry seeks explanations that are naturally agreeable to reason. The problem, of course, is that we do not live in a common-sense world. Heavier objects do not fall faster than lighter ones. Euclid geometry and Newtonian physics break down upon further review. Further, what is reasonable today may not be tomorrow, and any method of seeking answers that waivers, subject to popular opinion will not be long lasting.
Peirce traces the failures of these methods in involving the inquirer. Peirce thought proper reasoning would not be dependent on the observer, that there is a reality independent of what humans would like to think. Peirce is arguing for the scientific method, that independent observers, performing repeatable tests, will arrive at the same conclusion. The answer may not be the one we sought, but exists nonetheless. I still have 300 words to go; this might be an article in June.
