Helmut,
My earlier message may have been unclear, but what i meant was pretty
much equivalent to what you say here:
[[ In a general sense, Peirce did indeed anticipate the possibility of
non-equilibrium thermodynamics. The possibility of new types of order in
far-from-the-equilibrium situations
Ben Udell wrote:
But first, on a general note, let me say that among the issues driving my
current display of confusion error, is the question: if comprehension
is for quality predicate, while denotation is for objects
(resistances/reactions), then what dimension is for representational
Bernard Morand wrote:
Nice Jim! I had the feeling that I was blundering just at the time of
writing that the categories in the sense of maths have no denotation nor
connotation . However I could not see where the blunder was. So I decided
to let the idea as it was and see what will happen.
Jim, Ben, list
Jim wrote:
An object is anything that can be represented. Abstract objects such
as relations also have forms and locations that can be connoted and
denoted as discussed below.
It is my view (and I think Peirce's) that words or symbols such as
not, probably, if etc refer
