Talk:Phaneron

Feedback

This is the worst opinion on C.S. Peirce I have ever read. Peirce’s whole theory of pragmaticism is based on the ability of any mind to make observations that any other mind could. Solipsism is not an option. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Semeion (talk • contribs) 03:02, 9 July 2013‎ (UTC)

a confused post

Note: This section was added to the article, first by an IP account, and then by a new account:

Other Usages of the Term

"The term phaneron is also utilized, albeit rarely, by the bodybuilding community to mean the state of a bodybuilder's physique in relation to the bodybuilder's mind. How a bodybuilder perceives his or her physique in regard to physical aesthetics, mass, and symmetry, as well as how the mind reacts to certain excercise regimens, diets, supplements, and muscle flexation and hypertrophy. Due to the idea that a bodybuilder's gains are more mental than physical, the bodybuilder's phaneron is the chief instigator of success, the body itself being the receiver of said success. Therefore the bodybuilder is a three-fold being, according to this mode of thought, composing of (1) the psyche, or person, undergoing the bodybuilding regimen, (2) the phaneron, or mental instigator, assuming control of both emotional and chemical changes in the bodybuilder to fit the psyche's ideals and goals as perceived by the bodybuilder, and (3) the body actually undergoing the changes desired by the psyche and motivated by the phaneron, but conducting the bulk of the physical work via exercise, rest, and dieting. The body undergoes the physical changes that the phaneron instigates according to the psyche's will and desire. It can be said that though the phaneron is the chief worker of the bodybuilder, the psyche and the body are the only ones to benefit from the process because they receive emotional and physical benefit, respectively, according to the phaneron's motivation. If the bodybuilder disregards the phaneron entirely, he or she would suffer muscular atrophy and consequently emotional loss of confidence, if the phaneron's reality is thus percieved. Therefore a bodybuilder's phaneron is the prime instigator of his or her transformation, but is sensitive to the point of deconstructing all the work achieved, making it the most important factor of the bodybuilder and his or her training."

I removed the above material due to its confused mixing of the sense of the phaneron. It is true there are notions of effort in the phaneron, but there are also, continuous with it, notions of possibility and teleology. Phaneroscopy is a mode of observation and the phaneron is not an object discontinuous from the observation. It is an experence, but not merely limited to the experience. Peirce intentionally leaves it as a vague notion, but I suspect this is to accommodate his three categories in the act of observation. He does say that the observer is not to be influenced by tradition or authority during the act of observation. If this type of material is to be associated with C.S. Peirce, it should be referenced. Semeion (talk) 21:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I've left a note at User talk:PrinceMartyr, explaining that I searched for, but could not find, any references for the connection. –Quiddity (talk) 16:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)