Thread:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15762

Peircers,

I'm reposting this by way of trying to remember the context
of discussion on Peirce's 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3.

On 2/28/2015 1:02 PM, Jon Awbrey wrote:
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 .




Reply via email to