Questions Concerning Certain Faculties Claimed For Signs

Re: FB | Semiotics, Books, Links, News • Jon Awbrey • Dalibor Lošťák

JA:

Icon, Index, Symbol and all other classifications are ideal types abstracted from concrete signs and there are no pure types in actual existence.  However, it is a consequence of triadic relation irreducibility that symbols are in a genuine sense the generic type while icons and indices are specializations or so-called “degenerate” cases.

DL:

I think the first sentence answers the question brilliantly.  However, I disagree with your assertion about the “degenerate cases”.  It is my understanding that iconicity is the aspect of a sign that represents its Firstness, which is incapable of degeneracy.  This also leads me to the notion that fully degenerate Thirdness, as applied to a Symbol, is not an Icon.  I would be very interested to read your thoughts on this.

The way I see Categories applying to Peirce’s logic and semiotics may be gleaned from the following Survey page.

• Survey of Precursors Of Category Theory

The series beginning with the following post might be a good place to start.

• Peirce’s Categories • 1

cc: Peirce List (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)