The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoric
C. S. Peirce once described philosophical rhetoric as “the highest and most living branch of logic”. This article outlines a new interpretation of what prompted this unexpected elevation of the third subdivision of semiotic (understood as logic in the broad sense), and explores some of the implicati...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Tartu Press
2015-12-01
|
| Series: | Sign Systems Studies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/sss/article/view/15895 |
| _version_ | 1818641338711670784 |
|---|---|
| author | Mats Bergman |
| author_facet | Mats Bergman |
| author_sort | Mats Bergman |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | C. S. Peirce once described philosophical rhetoric as “the highest and most living branch of logic”. This article outlines a new interpretation of what prompted this unexpected elevation of the third subdivision of semiotic (understood as logic in the broad sense), and explores some of the implications of the proposed reading. Two plausible explanations are identified, leading to an exposition of Peirce’s equally puzzling association of rhetoric with objective logic in the 1890s. The final part of the essay briefly addresses the question of how Peirce’s subsequent shift from rhetoric to methodeutic may have affected his conception of the concluding branch of logic. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-16T23:25:35Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-bb10804844c94f86bacce0a643dfd112 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1406-4243 1736-7409 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-16T23:25:35Z |
| publishDate | 2015-12-01 |
| publisher | University of Tartu Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sign Systems Studies |
| spelling | doaj.art-bb10804844c94f86bacce0a643dfd1122022-12-21T22:12:02ZengUniversity of Tartu PressSign Systems Studies1406-42431736-74092015-12-0143410.12697/SSS.2015.43.4.06The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoricMats Bergman0Department of Social Research, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 54, 00014 University of HelsinkiC. S. Peirce once described philosophical rhetoric as “the highest and most living branch of logic”. This article outlines a new interpretation of what prompted this unexpected elevation of the third subdivision of semiotic (understood as logic in the broad sense), and explores some of the implications of the proposed reading. Two plausible explanations are identified, leading to an exposition of Peirce’s equally puzzling association of rhetoric with objective logic in the 1890s. The final part of the essay briefly addresses the question of how Peirce’s subsequent shift from rhetoric to methodeutic may have affected his conception of the concluding branch of logic.https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/sss/article/view/15895Charles Peircespeculative rhetoricobjective logicmethodeuticdevelopmentlogical evolution |
| spellingShingle | Mats Bergman The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoric Sign Systems Studies Charles Peirce speculative rhetoric objective logic methodeutic development logical evolution |
| title | The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoric |
| title_full | The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoric |
| title_fullStr | The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoric |
| title_full_unstemmed | The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoric |
| title_short | The highest branch of logic? On a neglected question of speculative rhetoric |
| title_sort | highest branch of logic on a neglected question of speculative rhetoric |
| topic | Charles Peirce speculative rhetoric objective logic methodeutic development logical evolution |
| url | https://ojs.utlib.ee/index.php/sss/article/view/15895 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT matsbergman thehighestbranchoflogiconaneglectedquestionofspeculativerhetoric AT matsbergman highestbranchoflogiconaneglectedquestionofspeculativerhetoric |