Abstract

In Peirce literature it is commonly held that a sign may have iconic, indexical, and symbolic aspects. In this paper, I argue that according to Peirce’s mature theory of signs, the theory expounded in the final version of the Syllabus of Logic of 1903, this cannot be the case. The paper also discusses two famous passages, one from the first version of the Syllabus, in which “hypoiconsµ are introduced, and another from the 1894 How to Reason. Both passages are usually taken as indications that for Peirce a sign may have iconic, indexical, and symbolic aspects; I offer an alternative interpretation of both passages