General Thoughts About Generality :)

What is on my mind today is how frustrated Charles Peirce must have felt with others wanting to dissolve his Phaneroscopy into other types of work regarding consciousness and phenomena. The reason I think he was so adamant about how his Phaneroscopy was/is so clearly not the same, is that from all that I understand, 'Phenomenology' is about a feeling / an idea / a perception, whereas Peirce tried and tried to get others to understand that his Phaneroscopy was/is about the qualities of feelings (Firstness), reaction against one's will (Secondness), and their generalizing or associating element (Thirdness). Everything that I have read where others are trying to include Peirce in their 'Phenomonology' seems as though they are just wanting to find ways to add his highly revered name to their postmodern conglomerations that are handed down from some other system of thought, and I truly believe Peirce would have found these attempts very off base and/or inadequate, not to mention quite upsetting. He dealt with that same frustration regarding pragmatism, which he had to change the name of his to Pragmaticism, and to this day he is still lumped in with those pragmatists! Most people have no idea how different the two are! There are a few resources online that delve into the differences for the persevering seeker of understanding, but only VERY recently has any scholar of Peirce attempted to shed light on his Phaneroscopy, and I'm one of them. It's difficult having seen life this way for most of mine, and not being able to explain it comprehensively to others. It took years of persistant searching to find whatever scraps I could that aligned with my thinking and perspective, and then I came upon Charles Sanders Peirce. I am forever grateful, and driven to use my understanding to the best of its ability. ... OUT