Jon,list On another quick note. I think there are advantages to the Cartesian U x U over the Boolean U since you can draw individuals from the Universe to build relational classes that aren't already stuck in classes or under predicates. With Boole, philosophically, there are no 'bare' or 'bald' particulars. Jim W > Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2015 13:02:52 -0500 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3 • Selection 7 > > Post : Peirce's 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3 • Selection 7 > http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/28/peirces-1880-algebra-of-logic-chapter-3-%e2%80%a2-selection-7/ > Date : February 28, 2015 at 12:30 pm > > Peircers, > > I am going to skip past the mostly formal machinations of §3 for now and > move on to the first selection from §4 on the Classification of Relatives. > As always, see the blog post linked above for the properly formatted text. > > <blockquote> > > Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.) > > §4. Classification of Relatives > > 225. Individual relatives are of one or other of the two forms > > A : A > A : B, > > and simple relatives are negatives of one or other of these two forms. > > 226. The forms of general relatives are of > infinite variety, but the following may be > particularly noticed. > > Relatives may be divided into those all whose individual aggregants are > of the form A : A and those which contain individuals of the form A : B. > The former may be called concurrents, the latter opponents. > > Concurrents express a mere agreement among objects. Such, for instance, > is the relative ‘man that is ──’, and a similar relative may be formed > from any term of singular reference. We may denote such a relative by > the symbol for the term of singular reference with a comma after it; > thus (m,) will denote ‘man that is ──’ if (m) denotes ‘man’. In the > same way a comma affixed to an n-fold relative will convert it into > an (n + 1)-fold relative. Thus, (l) being ‘lover of ──’, > (l,) will be ‘lover that is ── of ──’. > > The negative of a concurrent relative will be one each of > whose simple components is of the form \overline{A : A}, > and the negative of an opponent relative will be one > which has components of the form \overline{A : B}. > > We may also divide relatives into those which contain individual aggregants > of the form A : A and those which contain only aggregants of the form A : B. > The former may be called self-relatives, the latter alio-relatives. We also > have negatives of self-relatives and negatives of alio-relatives. > > </blockquote> > > References > > • Peirce, C.S. (1880), “On the Algebra of Logic”, > American Journal of Mathematics 3, 15–57. > Collected Papers (CP 3.154–251), > Chronological Edition (CE 4, 163–209). > > • Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, > vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), > vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, > Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 3 : Exact Logic, 1933. > > • Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, > Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington > and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–. Volume 4 (1879–1884), 1986. > > Resources > > • Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives > http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Peirce%27s_1870_Logic_Of_Relatives > > -- > > 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 .
