C.S. Peirce's rhetorical turn

Vincent Colapietro

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

While the work of such expositors as Max H. Fisch, James J. Liszka, Lucia Santaella, Anne Friedman, and Mats Bergman has helped bring into sharp focus why Peirce took the third branch of semiotic (speculative rhetoric) to be "the highest and most living branch of logic," more needs to be done to show the extent to which the least developed branch of his theory of signs is, at once, its potentially most fruitful and important. The author of this paper thus begins to trace out even more fully than these scholars have done the unfinished trajectory of Peirce's eventual realization of the importance of speculative rhetoric. In doing so, he is arguing for a shift from the formalist and taxonomic emphasis of so many commentators to a more thoroughly pragmaticist and "rhetorical" approach to interpreting Peirce's theory of signs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)16-52
Number of pages37
JournalTransactions of the Charles S Peirce Society
Volume43
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2007

Fingerprint

Rhetoric
Charles Sanders Peirce
Trajectory
Commentators
Logic
Formalist

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Philosophy

Cite this

Colapietro, Vincent. / C.S. Peirce's rhetorical turn. In: Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society. 2007 ; Vol. 43, No. 1. pp. 16-52.
@article{75b327acb2624fc1bc76160742fc1289,
title = "C.S. Peirce's rhetorical turn",
abstract = "While the work of such expositors as Max H. Fisch, James J. Liszka, Lucia Santaella, Anne Friedman, and Mats Bergman has helped bring into sharp focus why Peirce took the third branch of semiotic (speculative rhetoric) to be {"}the highest and most living branch of logic,{"} more needs to be done to show the extent to which the least developed branch of his theory of signs is, at once, its potentially most fruitful and important. The author of this paper thus begins to trace out even more fully than these scholars have done the unfinished trajectory of Peirce's eventual realization of the importance of speculative rhetoric. In doing so, he is arguing for a shift from the formalist and taxonomic emphasis of so many commentators to a more thoroughly pragmaticist and {"}rhetorical{"} approach to interpreting Peirce's theory of signs.",
author = "Vincent Colapietro",
year = "2007",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2979/TRA.2007.43.1.16",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "16--52",
journal = "Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society",
issn = "0009-1774",
publisher = "Indiana University Press",
number = "1",

}

C.S. Peirce's rhetorical turn. / Colapietro, Vincent.

In: Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society, Vol. 43, No. 1, 01.01.2007, p. 16-52.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - C.S. Peirce's rhetorical turn

AU - Colapietro, Vincent

PY - 2007/1/1

Y1 - 2007/1/1

N2 - While the work of such expositors as Max H. Fisch, James J. Liszka, Lucia Santaella, Anne Friedman, and Mats Bergman has helped bring into sharp focus why Peirce took the third branch of semiotic (speculative rhetoric) to be "the highest and most living branch of logic," more needs to be done to show the extent to which the least developed branch of his theory of signs is, at once, its potentially most fruitful and important. The author of this paper thus begins to trace out even more fully than these scholars have done the unfinished trajectory of Peirce's eventual realization of the importance of speculative rhetoric. In doing so, he is arguing for a shift from the formalist and taxonomic emphasis of so many commentators to a more thoroughly pragmaticist and "rhetorical" approach to interpreting Peirce's theory of signs.

AB - While the work of such expositors as Max H. Fisch, James J. Liszka, Lucia Santaella, Anne Friedman, and Mats Bergman has helped bring into sharp focus why Peirce took the third branch of semiotic (speculative rhetoric) to be "the highest and most living branch of logic," more needs to be done to show the extent to which the least developed branch of his theory of signs is, at once, its potentially most fruitful and important. The author of this paper thus begins to trace out even more fully than these scholars have done the unfinished trajectory of Peirce's eventual realization of the importance of speculative rhetoric. In doing so, he is arguing for a shift from the formalist and taxonomic emphasis of so many commentators to a more thoroughly pragmaticist and "rhetorical" approach to interpreting Peirce's theory of signs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67651107324&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67651107324&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2979/TRA.2007.43.1.16

DO - 10.2979/TRA.2007.43.1.16

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:67651107324

VL - 43

SP - 16

EP - 52

JO - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society

JF - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society

SN - 0009-1774

IS - 1

ER -