Talk:Sign relation

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of language

Peirce's theory of triadic sign relations Jon Awbrey 03:32, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert war

I just made it so all the symbols will appear in retarded MSIE 7. It works in Mozilla FireFox too. Then I checked the history, didn't realize I had walked into the middle of a reversion war. The Tetrast (talk) 18:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a revert war, it's Awbrey throwing his toys out of the pram. You're fine, and thanks for the input. Guy (Help!) 20:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, indeed; I agree with Guy. Jon Awbrey created a lot of wonderful articles in his field, then made the mistake of taking the acclaimed genius Charles Sanders Peirce's POV to articles like Truth where Peirce is just one POV among many. Jon got upset at not being able to portray that POV as "the Truth", and took his rage to WP:NOR where he self-destructed and we all agreed he had to be banned. He is now trying to disrupt Wikipedia. All the "war" you see is Awbrey puppets. Awbrey's wonderful articles on logic should be added to as you see fit. Please carry on. Thank you. WAS 4.250 (talk) 22:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's the most succinct account of the whole sorry business I've yet seen. Well done. Guy (Help!) 20:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. WAS 4.250 (talk) 04:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has come to my attention that there made be some who dispute the above. If so, please provide diffs as evidence. Everyone makes mistakes. But the truth, as best as I know it, is as stated above. WAS 4.250 (talk) 04:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External link suggestion

I suggest adding to the external links:

Atkin, Albert (2006). "Peirce's Theory of Signs". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

It seems both introductory and comprehensive, succeeding to reach a hard-to-availe balance.

Physis (talk) 00:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A convenient distinction of two kinds of meaning

Link...--> --Faustnh (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]