Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 1

New discussions of the so-called “Liar Paradox” have broken out at several places on the web in recent weeks (1) (2) and these always bring to my mind at least a number of critical ways in which the Peircean paradigm of logic as semiotics differs from the fallback paradigm that bedevils the thinking of those who have yet to see by Peirce’s lights.

And that brings to my mind at least the following oldie but still goodie that articulates what I take to be the issue at the root of this and many other pseudo-problems.  (I have revised the title a bit for this edition.)

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics

Meaning is a privilege not a right.
Not all pictures depict.
Not all signs denote.

Never confuse a property of a sign,
just for instance, existence,
with a sign of a property,
for instance, existence.

Taking a property of a sign
for a sign of a property
is the zeroth sign of
nominal thinking
and the first

Also Sprach 0*
2002 Oct 09

This entry was posted in Denotation, Epimenides, Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Peirce List, Pragmatics, Pragmatism, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 1

  1. Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 7 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.