James Liszka

Although philosophers often focus on the essays of Leopold's Sand County Almanac, especially "The Land Ethics," there is also a normative argument present in the stories that comprise most of the book. In fact, the shack stories may be more persuasive, with a subtlety and complexity not available in his prose piece. This paper develops a narrative ethics methodology gleaned from rhetoric theory and current interest in narrative ethics among literary theorists, in order to discern the normative underpinnings of the stories in Part 1. The narrative ethics approach sidesteps the need to ground the land ethic in ethical theory--which has been a reconstructive and problematic task for the philosophical interpreters of Leopold--and suggests, instead, that it emerges in Leopold's very effort to narrate his professional, personal and practical experience with nature. This involves examining the stories in terms of their emotional, logical and performative aspects. The result is an analysis that shows not only how these stories express normative claims, but also justify them. One conclusion of the analyses is that, in the narratives, there is less emphasis on the problematic notion of an over-arching "community" than in the prose pieces, and more emphasis on the metaphor of other living things as "fellow travelers" in the "odyssey of evolution." Second, the narratives take on an ironic attitude toward the ecological order, less discernible in the prose essays. The order itself may not ethically admirable, but should be preserved since it makes possible any ethical relations within it. Thus, the narrative reading suggests some temperance to the usual holistic interpretation of his land ethic and its concomitant criticisms, especially the charge of ecofacism. We should not take the land ethic imperative at its face value, in the sense that the good of the order itself is an intrinsic good. In the narratives, individuals are shown not merely to be means to the ecological whole, but the focus of sympathy and concern, in a manner that demands their dood should also be an object of moral consideration.

The aim of the book is to complete what is incomplete in Peirce’s study of the normative sciences, and to get a good sense of his ethical thought. This is not merely to understand Peirce, but to introduce an insightful account of ethics. Peirce’s work in ethics is fragmentary. The goal is to take the leads Peirce provides, develop them further in that direction and fill in the gaps. Peirce was primarily a logician and scientist. But he became interested in the study of ethics once he saw how scientific reasoning was being used instrumentally in the Gilded Age of 19th century America. Peirce realized that logical and scientific reasoning needed ethical direction in determining its proper use. The introduction provides an overview of how Peirce manages this task. Peirce sees moral agency as primarily purposive. He uses a desire-belief model of human motivation to analyze such conduct. He realizes that the sort of practical reasoning entailed in this model leads to an amoral instrumentalism. What is required to fix this problem is an account of good ends and righteous means. The normative sciences of ethics and esthetics are to fix this problem. Peirce’s convergence theory of truth serves as a guide for determining what are good ends and ideals of conduct, and his account of a community of inquiry reveals the sorts of norms needed to be successful in such an effort. In a different sense of esthetics, Peirce sees it as an aid to ethics in determining ends worthy of pursuit.

A teoria convergente da verdade de Peirce é uma abordagem intuitiva e razoável da verdade. No seu sentido mais geral, vincula a verdade aos resultados da investigação. De acordo com a máxima pragmática, Peirce percebeu que as consequências práticas de afirmações verdadeiras são de trazer investigações à fruição e resolver opinião. No entanto, a teoria da verdade de Peirce é muitas vezes difamada e mal-entendida. Argumenta-se, aqui, que uma vez que se entende que a teoria convergente é uma inferência e generalização oriunda do notável teorema matemático conhecido como a Lei dos Grandes Números, e como esse teorema fornece certeza matemática à indução como o cerne do método científico, muitos dos problemas desaparecem. Parte do mal-entendido também se deve ao fato que Peirce tinha três sentidos distintos de convergência, os quais muitos comentadores confundem ou interpretam erroneamente. Com esse entendimento, será mostrado que ao contrário das análises de Cheryl Misak e Christopher Hookway, Peirce argumenta que investigação persistente por bons métodos não é apenas um ideal regulador para atingir a verdade – uma esperança intelectual – mas uma possibilidade comprovada matematicamente que já resultou em verdades estabelecidas.

Argumenta-se aqui que a melhor interpretação da estética de Peirce é como uma ciência normativa de fins ideais. As influências de Peirce neste particular incluem a noção de kalos de Platão, A educação estética do homem de Friedrich Schiller, e a arquitetônica kantiana. Baseada principalmente nos rascunhos de Minute Logic em 1902 e as Palestras de Harvard em 1903, as características essenciais de uma ciência normativa são discutidas e a relação da estética às outras duas ciências normativas da lógica e da ética é analisada. O conceito de Peirce de bondade estética é desenvolvido, e os critérios para o que ele considera como um summum bonum são examinados. As próprias formulações de Peirce do summum bonum são examinados, inclusive sua noção de razoabilidade concreta, como também uma explicação interessante dos ideais fundamentais encontrada em um fragmento de manuscrito de 1903. O artigo conclui com uma discussão entre o que é chamado de estética positiva e negativa de Peirce, entendido como duas abordagens diferentes à formulação de fins ideais.

In his later years, Peirce proposed the idea of ethics as a normative science. Is such a thing possible? John Dewey asks “whether scientific propositions about the direction of human conduct, about any situation into which the idea of should enters, are possible; and, if so, of what sort they are and the grounds upon which they rest”. If the meaning of ‘science’ here is taken in its contemporary sense—the way in which physics or biology might be understood—then normative science implies ethical naturalism, the position that normativity is explainable as a natural property, and capable of empirical study. Russ Shafer-Landau defines it precisely in these terms, where moral properties..

The settlements surrounding the Exxon Valdez oil spill prove to be an interesting case of retributive and corrective justice in regard to damage to the ecology of the commons, particularly in light of the recent Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico. After reviewing the harm done to the ecology of Prince William Sound by the spill, and an account of Exxon Corporation’s responsibility, I examine the details of the litigation, particularly the Supreme Court decision in this matter. In the early settlement, there is a clear disproportion between damage awards to plaintiffs representing the current economic users of Prince William Sound versus the trustees for the Sound’s commons. I argue that the disproportion reveals not only a thoroughly economic understanding of ecological commons, but bias in the treatment of its current economic users, as opposed to an understanding of such ecologies as true commons shared over generations. I argue that such biases fail reasonable moral tests and do not stand up to common principles of retributive justice. I end by suggesting a legal maneuver to correct such tendencies.

Originally published in 1992 in Portuguese, the English translation of the 2015, updated edition of Kósmos Noetós will open Ivo Ibri's fine book to a wider audience. The book ventures into the most difficult territory of Peirce's body of work. The topics of Prof. Ibri's study include the more recondite matters of Peirce's objective idealism, synechism, tychism, cosmology, and the accounts of reality. Starting with the phenomenology, Ibri attempts a coherent picture of Peirce's metaphysics, using the results to provide an interesting interpretation of Peirce's pragmatism.The book is divided into three major sections: the World as Appearance, the World as Reality, and the Knowable World. In a very nice exegesis of...

Attempts to explain Peirce’s various classifications of signs have been a preoccupation of many Peirce scholars. Opinions are mixed about the sense, coherence, and fruitfulness of Peirce’s various versions, particularly the latter ones. I argue here that it is not a fruitful enterprise, even if sense could be made of them. Although Peirce makes his motivations for the classification of the sciences fairly explicit, it’s hard to find Peirce’s reasons for sign classification. More importantly, I try to make the case that such classifications are premised on a reductionist framework of semiosis that is contrary to the irreducible triadic character of signs that Peirce otherwise espouses. The reductionism is the result of Peirce’s use of certain models for his sign classifications, in particular, Mendeleev’s periodic table. I suggest that the remedy for the reductionism is to re-emphasize the processual and functional view of semiosis, rather than to focus on particular classes of signs. Corresponding to the three triadic conditions of semiosis, I argue that signs function to inform, represent or refer, and interpret, and that understanding these three function and how they interrelate may prove to be a more fruitful approach to sign analysis than sign classification.

According to T. L. Short, Peirce's early thought - sign account of semeiotic engenders fatal flaws. On the one hand, it entails an infinite regressus of representation that cannot feasibly explain the connection between signs and objects and, on the other, an infinite progressus, leaving Peirce's theory without the wherewithal to account for the sign's meaning and significance. According to Short, Peirce overcomes the first flaw through the robust development of the notion of the index and the concept of collateral experience. The second flaw is overcome through the pragmatic theory of meaning, connected as it is to the notion of purpose and, ultimately, a complex theory of teleology. My commentary focuses primarily on Short's important analysis of Peirce's teleology. I argue that he is successful in giving a plausible, naturalistic account of Peirce's theory without straying from the spirit of Peirce's systematic thought. Although, in my view, the book is the best account of Peirce's semiotic grammar in print, it fails to give a sufficient systematic analysis of the other two branches of Peirce's semeiotic — critical logic and formal rhetoric.

In the last few decades psychologists have gained a clearer picture of the notion of happiness and a more sophisticated account of its explanation. Their research has serious consequences for any ethic based on the maximization of happiness, especially John Stuart Mill’s classical eudaimonistic utilitarianism. In the most general terms, the research indicates that a congenital basis for homeostatic levels of happiness in populations, the hedonic treadmill effect, and other personality factors, contribute to maintain a satisfactory level of happiness over the long run for a large percentage of any population, and relatively independently of the circumstances of the population. Consequently, although there are certainly ethical reasons to address the conditions of persons and populations, it is of marginal value to base such decisions on improvements in their levels of happiness. The happiness of others is not a sensible criterion for ethical decision-making.

A close reading of Peirce’s pragmatic maxim shows a correlation between meaning and purpose. If the meaning of a concept, proposition or hypothesis is clarified by formulating its practical effects, those also can be articulated as practical maxims. To the extent that the hypotheses or propositions upon which they are based are true, practical maxims recommend reliable courses of action. This can be translated into a broader claim of an integral relation between semiosis and goal-directed or teleological systems. Any goal-directed system, to be propagating, must be capable of coordinating the information in its internal or endergonic processes with exergonic information found in its environment. Signs are critical links between these two sources of information and must also serve as steering mechanisms for that system as well. If signs detected or represented information in the environments without using that information to steer the system, it would have no practical effect on the system; conversely, if a system could steer itself, but had no representation of exergonic information, it would fail to be propagating. Obviously, to get food, it must not only find it, but must also use that information to direct its behavior in a manner that makes use of that food. Using concepts found in complex systems and modern information theory, it is argued that this analysis requires a distinction between information and meaning. The result of this investigation is the claim that meaning can be understood as the propagating work of information. The remainder of the paper follows some of the ramification of this analysis for Peirce’s semiotic theory.

Although John Dewey has had the most profound effect on education, less is known about the philosophy of education of the original founder of pragmatism, Charles Peirce Using Peirce’s theory of formal rhetoric, I try to show that Peirce’s philosophy of education, when fully understood, is aligned with Dewey’s pedagogy of experiential learning, and can provide a justification for the promotion of active learning in the classroom. Peirce’s rhetoric, as one part of his logical or semiotic theory, argues that reasoning alone is not sufficient to gain knowledge, but that it must be embedded within a community of inquiry, of a certain sort. Applying this to the classroom, I argue that we, as teachers, should endeavor to create the features of a proper community of inquiry in the classroom, one that emphasizes engagement of the students in doing research rather than passively receiving information about its results.

A strong case can be made that Peirce’s formal rhetoric is primarily a theory of inquiry. Peirce’s convergence theory of truth requires a community of inquiry enduring indefinitely over time. Such a community, then, must promote “solidarity” in Peirce’s terms, a consistent practice of cooperation among inquirers over generations. One of the tasks of his formal rhetoric, then, is to analyze the conditions for solidarity. Using Peirce’s framework of a belief-desire model for practical action, solidarity can be promoted if there are commonly desired ends and a consensus of beliefs about the best means to attain those ends in inquiry. Peirce recognizes, however, that the community of inquiry is constituted with different types of inquirers who have different purposes for inquiry. He divides them among the “pure” theoretical scientists, applied scientists and practical inquirers – the general public – who are interested in the practical applications that can bring betterment to their lives. It is argued here that Peirce’s apparent inconsistencies concerning the role and purpose of science can be attributed to cautions addressed to each of these different audiences. The remainder of the paper explores the problematics of solidarity in a community of inquirers who have different ends for inquiry, and how Peirce attempts to address the puzzles and paradoxes that result.