“Do Not Block the Way of Inquiry” - C.S. Peirce
… Well then, let us try to think of some “correct questions” to continue this inquiry. … so in this case wouldn’t at least some “correct” follow up series of questions be:
When you say “ours” what exactly do you mean by “ours”? Do you mean - Not “yours” (yours being you and your colleagues (regardless of exactly from “where” and or “how” they are paid) or those with for which you work under any circumstances whomever they might be) personally.
Do you mean “ours” in terms of an / the “organization” (either military or civilian) for which you work? “Work for” meaning either “paid by” or for whom “you” (uncompensated - by any menas- either alone or with “colleagues”) “perform (act in the world either by word or deed) services / tasks”?
Do you mean by “ours” humanity in general.
Are you a member of “humanity” (The question is asking: Are you genetically human?)
I’m sure others can think of many more variations of meaning and usage for the word “ours”.
A little background may be had in Susan Haack’s paper on C.S. Peirce’s thought on the importance of inquiry titled “Do Not Block the Way of Inquiry”
Available gratis at:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2612013
Abstract
The first goal is to understand why Peirce describes his motto, “Do Not Block the Way of Inquiry,” as a corollary of the “first rule of reason,” why he believes it deserves to be inscribed on every wall of the city of philosophy, and what he has in mind when he characterizes the various barricades philosophers set up, the many obstacles they put in the path of inquiry. This soon leads us to important, substantive themes in Peirce’s meta-philosophical, cosmological, metaphysical, logical, and epistemological work (§1). However, it also leads us to what might seem to be a tension in his account of the motives for inquiry. So the second goal is to track the source of this apparent tension, and to show how Peirce resolved it (§2). But the ultimate goal is to explain why Peirce’s warning against blocking the way of inquiry is no less important, given the condition of philosophy today, than it was when he offered it more than a century ago-perhaps even more so (§3).