|
| Home | Writings | Essential Peirce | Site Guide |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||
|
The aim of the seminar is to enable visiting scholars to present their work to a specialized audience that has a strong interest in the work of Charles S. Peirce. It meets on an irregular basis at the offices of the Peirce Edition Project: 902 West New York Street, ES 0010, Indianapolis, IUPUI campus. To receive advance notice of talks by email please contact the organizer Professor Cornelis de Waal.
Forthcoming talks:Monday March 28 at 3:00 pm Abstract. The historiography of logic conceives of a Fregean revolution in which modern mathematical logic (also called symbolic logic) has replaced Aristotelian logic. The preeminent expositors of this conception are Jean van Heijenoort (1912–1986) and Donald Angus Gillies. The innovations and characteristics that comprise mathematical logic and distinguish it from Aristotelian logic, according to this conception, created ex nihilo by Gottlob Frege (1848–1925) in his Begriffsschrift of 1879, and with Bertrand Russell (1872–1970) as its chief. This position likewise understands the algebraic logic of Augustus De Morgan (1806–1871), George Boole (1815–1864), Charles Sanders Peirce (1838–1914), and Ernst Schröder (1841–1902) as belonging to the Aristotelian tradition. The “Booleans” are understood, from this vantage point, to merely have rewritten Aristotelian syllogistic in algebraic guise. The most detailed listing and elaboration of Frege’s innovations—and the characteristics that distinguish mathematical logic from Aristotelian logic—were set forth by van Heijenoort. I consider each of the elements of van Heijenoort’s list and note the extent to which Peirce had also developed each of these aspects of logic. I also consider the extent to which Peirce and Frege were aware of, and may have influenced, one another’s logical writings. Irving H. Anellis has been Visiting Research Associate at the Peirce Edition since 2008. He taught IUPUI’s “Intermediate Symbolic Logic” and Intensive Reading in “Advanced Symbolic Logic” in the Fall 2009 semester. His doctoral thesis director at Brandeis University (1977) was differential geometer and historian of logic Jean van Heijenoort. He has taught in both philosophy and mathematics departments at various colleges and universities, worked as a Research Associate at the Bertrand Russell Editorial Project at McMaster University (Hamilton, Ontario), served as a contributing editor to the Peirce Edition starting with Volume 5, and was founding editor of the journal Modern Logic. His research specialties are in mathematical logic and set theory, with emphases in metamathematics, proof theory, model theory, Boolean algebra, lattice theory and Boolean groups, and set-theoretic foundations of analysis and number theory; history of logic, with emphases in proof theory, model theory, algebraic logic, Peirce, Russell, geometry, logic and the axiomatic method, and mathematical logic in Russia and the Soviet Union; and history of mathematics, with emphases in universal algebra, 1oth to 17th century Russian mathematics, and history of mathematics education in Russia. He is currently working on a historiographical, philosophical, and sociological investigation into the history of the transition from algebraic logic to logistic (the first-order function-theoretic calculus) as the canonical standard of mathematical logic. The lecture will be given on Monday March 28 at 3:00 pm at the Institute of American Thought in Room ES 0016. The institute is housed in the basement of the Education and Social Work building on the IUPUI campus, 902 West New York Street, Indianapolis. For more information contact Cornelis de Waal at cdwaal@iupui.eduThursday April 14 at 3:00 pm Iris Smith Fischer In the mid- to late-1880’s, as Charles Peirce tested and revised his theory of semeiotic, his wife Juliette undertook the study of acting at the Lyceum Theatre School with the renowned playwright and impresario Steele MacKaye. Using archival research done at the Peirce Edition Project, Harvard University, and Dartmouth College, I will begin by giving a brief account of the Lyceum School and Juliette’s experience there, as I have reconstructed it, and the Peirces’ ongoing interest in theatre. The rest of my presentation will describe surprising correspondences between MacKaye’s influential ideas on acting and the shape of Peirce’s thinking at that time. MacKaye’s interactions with Juliette, as well as the Peirces’ performance activities more generally (writing and translating dramatic scenes, conducting private theatricals with friends, and Charles’s interest in elocution), add to our understanding of his theory of semeiotic. The legacy emerges partially in Peirce’s essay “Trichotomic,” where he addresses MacKaye’s theory of acting. Those ideas mirrored those of his mentor, François Delsarte, who had developed a science of acting, even employing the French term semiotique in his lectures. Admittedly, Delsarte’s semiotics was scarcely scientific; put in the service of aesthetics, its detailed account of bodily and vocal mechanics rested on the architecture of his religious and philosophical beliefs. Thus, while Delsarte’s sign is also a triadic relation, the similarities between his semiotics and Peirce’s semeiotic appear to be superficial. Yet Delsarte’s ideas, as transmitted by MacKaye, introduced rigorous principles into American actor training. And there are remarkable correspondences with Peirce’s ideas. I take as my focus Delsarte’s phrase “the semiotics of the shoulder,” which conveys the role of the index, taken as a sign that conveys the theatrical object directly. Without the dropped shoulder’s “irresistible character of intensity,” as Delsarte called it, the actor’s face or words cannot manifest their meaning. Charles and Juliette were conservative in their theatrical tastes. Juliette pursued refined roles that attempted to connect with audiences at very high intellectual and emotional levels. Unlike Henry James, who criticized MacKaye’s style of performance for its Delsartian emphasis on codified acting techniques, classical postures, and intense emotion, Peirce saw MacKaye and his acting students engaging audiences in a rich and complex theatrical experience. In the actor’s semiotic appeal to the audience’s desire for feeling, Peirce recognized what I call the performance nature of signs. Iris Smith Fischer is an associate professor of English and a courtesy professor of Theatre at the University of Kansas, where she teaches modern and contemporary drama, literary and performance theory, the avant garde, and semiotics. She received her M.A. and Ph.D. in Comparative Literature from Indiana University at Bloomington. She has edited American Signatures: Semiotic Inquiry and Method by Thomas A. Sebeok (Oklahoma University Press, 1991) and co-edited Interrogating America through Theatre and Performance (Palgrave Macmillan, 2006 [cloth], 2009 [paper]). Her monograph Mabou Mines: Making Avant-Garde Theater in the 1970s will appear in 2011 from the University of Michigan Press. Among her articles on semiotics are “The Semiotics of the Theatre of Cruelty,” “Performance and Performativity: Theatre Semiotics as Culture Study,” and “C.S. Peirce and the Habit of Theatre.” The lecture will take place on Thursday April 14 at 3:00 pm at the Institute of American Thought in Room ES 0016. The institute is housed in the basement of the Education and Social Work building on the IUPUI campus, 902 West New York Street, Indianapolis. For more information contact Cornelis de Waal at cdwaal@iupui.edu
Previous speakers:Francesco Poggiani (Universita' Degli Studi di Milano, Italy) November 2010 Charles Seibert (University of Cincinnati) September 2010 Cathy Legg (University of Waikato, New Zealand) June 2010 Jim Wible (University of New Hampshire) April 2010 Susan Haack (University of Miami) February 2010 Ana Maria Guimaraes Jorge (Faap-Sp And Puc-Sp, Brasil) January 2010 Josiah Lee Auspitz and Kilian Stoffel (Peirce Edition Project; University of Neuchatel, respectively) December 2009 Ivor Grattan-Guinness (Middlesex University, London) June 2008 Mats Bergman (University of Helsinki / Arcada University of Applied Sciences) June 2008 Henrik Rydenfelt (University of Helsinki) April 2008 Tom Short (Chairman PEP Board of Advisors) April 2008 Michael Brodrick (Vanderbilt University) March 2008 Vincent Colapietro (Pennsylvania State University) February 2008 Francesca Bordogna (Northwestern University) February 2008 Xu Peng (Zhengzhou University and Fudan University) June 2007 Ignacio Redondo (University of Navarra) May 2007 Giovanni Maddalena (University of Molise) January 2007 Mats Bergman (University of Helsinki) October 2006 Helmut Pape (Bamberg University) June 2006 Vitaly V. Kiryushchenko (St. Petersburg State School of Economics, Russia) April 2006 James R. Wible (University of New Hampshire) April 2006 James Hoopes (Kettering University and Babson College) April 2006 Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen (University of Turku and University of Helsinki) December 2005 Irving H. Anellis (Brandeis University) November 2005 James Liszka (University of Alaska Anchorage) November 2005 Lauro Frederico Barbosa da Silveira (State University of São Paulo, Marília, Brazil) September 2005 Jaime Nubiola (Universidad de Navarra, Spain) August 2005 Ramón Rodríguez Aguilera (Universidad de Sevilla, Spain) August 2005 Ciano Aydin (Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen) April 2005 Helmut Pape (Universität Hannover) Christopher Hookway (University of Sheffield) Floyd Merrell (Purdue University) Carl Hausman (Penn State University) Paul Forster (University of Toronto) Priscilla Farias (University of São Paulo) Tom Short (Independent Scholar) Mathias Girel (Université Paris-I Panthéon-Sorbonne) Justus Lentsch (Universität Hannover) François Latraverse (Université du Québec à Montréal) Giovanni Maddalena (University of Rome) Maria de Lourdes Bacha, (Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, São Paulo) Klaus Oehler and Maria Liatsi (Universität Hamburg) Joseph Ransdell (Texas Tech University) Cassiano Rodrigues (Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo)
|
||
|
|
||
|
Contact the Peirce
Edition |
||