Comunicação e Ética: O sistema semiótico de Charles ... - Ubi Thesis

✐✐✐✐Arquitectónica e Metafísica Evolucionária 369Peirce de certa forma cumpre esta profecia kantiana, pois o sinequismo ea metafísica enquanto princípio unificador deduzido da lógica, ou ideia profundaque haveria de ordenar o sistema, só no fim se lhe revela, como ele próprioadmite em carta a James datada de 1902. “Mas apareço a mim próprio,presentemente, como o único depositário do sistema, que está perfeitamenteconcatenado, e não pode ser apresentado apropriadamente em fragmentos”.Este sistema de que Peirce é depositário é o pragmatismo, que se funda, comodescobrirá quase no final da sua vida, nas três ciências normativas, as quaispor sua vez correspondem às três categorias. E esta concepção da naturezae pensamento “conduz ao sinequismo, que é a pedra angular da arquitectónica”.102Depois da exploração meticulosa na vertente lógica, do mundo da experiência,e ontológica, culminando na metafísica, o sistema encontra-se unificado,com as partes que o compõem perfeitamente interdependentes no todo.Não admira. A concatenação entre os diversos elementos foi urdida em ordema servir esse fim.É verdade que do meio para o fim da sua vida o trabalho de Peirce pode serlido como uma reconciliação com o hegelianismo, ou uma reconstrução destea partir da doutrina das categorias, mas o programa que conduz a essa reconci-102 . “But I seem to myself to be the sole depositary at present of the completely developedsystem, which all hangs together and cannot receive any proper presentation in fragments. Myown view in 1877 was crude. Even when I gave my Cambridge lectures I had not really got tothe bottom of it or seen the unity of the whole thing. It was not until after that that I obtainedthe proof that logic must be founded on ethics, of which it is a higher development. Even then,I was for some time so stupid as not to see that ethics rests in the same manner on a foundationof esthetics, - by which, it is needless to say, I don’t mean milk and water and sugar.These three normative sciences correspond to my three categories, which in their psychologicalaspect, appear as Feeling, Reaction, Thought. I have advanced my understanding ofthese categories much since Cambridge days; and can now put them in a much clearer lightand more convincingly. The true nature of pragmatism cannot be understood without them. Itdoes not, as I seem to have thought at first, take Reaction as the be-all, but it takes the end-all asthe be-all, and the End is something that gives its sanction to action. It is of the third category.Only one must not take a nominalistic view of Thought as if it were something that a man hadin his consciousness. Consciousness may mean any one of the three categories. But if it is tomean Thought it is more without us than within. It is we that are in it, rather than it in any ofus. Of course I can’t explain myself in a few words; but I think it would do the psychologists agreat service to explain to them my conception of the nature of thought.This then leads to synechism, which is the keystone of the arch”, Collected Papers, .8.255-257.www.labcom.pt✐✐✐✐