Reading Peirce Differently: A Response to David Dilworth

Abstract

In response to criticism of an article on Peirce’s objective idealism, I raise a question about how the philosophical writings of Peirce should be read. Are writings widely separated in time to be read as developing different aspects of a single, comprehensive system, or are they, at least in some cases, to be read as trying out a sequence of alternative hypotheses? And how is that question to be resolved? And in which way did Peirce himself conceive of his philosophical work?