Thread on The Great Chain of Reasoning:
GF:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13876
ET:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13878
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13879
GF:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13880
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13885
FS:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13886
SR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13887
FS:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13888
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13890
GF:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13894
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13896
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13897
GF:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13898
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13899
FS:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13901
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13906
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13937
SJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13938
Sung & All,
Here I was using "matrix" in its more native and pregnant sense of "something
within which
something else originates or develops" (Webster), always bearing chemical and
geological
images in mind of a mother liquor out of which crystals precipitate or "the
natural material in
which a fossil, metal, gem, crystal, or pebble [read "calculus"] is embedded"
(Webster).
I was really just trying to vary idiom in order to avoid saying "sign relation"
every other phrase.
More prosaically, I might have said "sign relation perfused with genuine symbols" or
"sign relation
glued together (glia?) and greased to the gills with genuine symbols".
Regards,
Jon
Sungchul Ji wrote:
Jon wrote:
"But analogies and icons all break in time, at one point or another, and it is only their
embedding in a more fluid and robust symbolic matrix that makes it possible for us to use them
where they fit and to set them aside when they fail."
By "symbolic matrix" do you mean algebraic and formal expressions in contrast
to diagrams ?
Sung
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt At:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13901
Exactly.
And this is one of those places where we have to watch out for the possibility of a backward
step, where it is very tempting to fall back on the "Mirror Of Nature Theory Of Science"
(MONTOS) and the "Iconic Doctrine Of Language" (IDOL). ;)
The diagrammatic and dynamic qualities of Peirce's logic, as epitomized in the entitative and
existential interpretations of his logical graphs, were chief among the features that drew me
to explore his logical systems from the very beginning of my studies. But analogies and icons
all break in time, at one point or another, and it is only their embedding in
a more fluid and
robust symbolic matrix that makes it possible for us to use them where they
fit and to set
them aside when they fail.
Regards,
Jon
Frederik Stjernfelt wrote:
Dear Jon, list - I also remarked that in McCulloch. You're right about the less than
straightforward relation between logical consequence and temporal sequence … If the two were
identical, mental processes probably would be unable to address contents
different from
those processes … Best F
Den 04/09/2014 kl. 16.10 skrev Jon Awbrey
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>:
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt At:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13886
Frederik,
Yes, the orthogonality or independence of descriptive and normative sciences is noted by
McCulloch in his opening lines. The thing that struck me like a lightning synapse when I
first read that passage, long time passing, was the fact that he set the logical arrow
opposite to the causal arrow, invoking the shade of Duns Scotus and bound causes, which I
looked up once or twice but didn't exactly get clear about, but anyway it sets the mind to
thinking that there is nothing terribly automatic or straightforward about the relation of
logical consequence and temporal sequence. Realizing that possibility opens up a much wider
field, and I dare say a more realistic field of investigation.
Et sic deinceps ...
Jon
--
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
