Inquiry Blog • http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/17/relations-their-relatives-1/ • http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/17/relations-their-relatives-2/ • http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/18/relations-their-relatives-3/ • http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/27/relations-their-relatives-4/
Peirce List JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15704 JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15705 JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15708 JLRC:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15716 JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15718 HR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15719 JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15753 HR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15774 Helmut, List, In systems theory and engineering there is a well-recognized duality or complementarity between the dimensions of Control and Information, also cast in terms of Action and Perception, Actuators and Detectors, Effectors and Sensors, and many other aliases. There are the devices of "reachability matrices", representing the operations needed to put a system in a given state, and "observability matrices", representing the operations needed to identify a system as being in a given state. The appearance of matrices at this point, understood in the sense of 2-dimesional rectangular arrays of coefficients, should clue us to the mainly dyadic character of the analysis and design that issue from them. And yet there is every opportunity in systems theory and engineering to open up the additional "elbow room" that triadic relations can provide. Regards, Jon On 3/3/2015 1:16 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
Thank you, Jon! I see it somehow like this: There are action systems and reflection systems. My way of triadizing would be: In an active system the triad is "event (or action), entity (or object), relation (or set of relations, structure)". All these three parts are internalized (represented-as-) entities or objects in a reflecting system, a mind. The triad "event, entity, relation" applies to a reflective system as well, but here the events are that what happens in a mind (representamens??). The relations are the persistent concepts that are present to the mind (like ways of thinking, routines: laws, habits, thirdnesses??), and the entities (immediate objects??) are the concepts or memory contents the mind has access to in a situation (a sign situation). I am not sure of this, it is just a scetch. Maybe it would be better, not to say "entity", but "object". What would an interpretant be? Maybe a new relation... Best, Helmut
-- 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 .
