On 12/14/15 8:00 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote:
1. Mathematical equations can be read as sentences, but when the number of terms is large, the reader must evaluate the individual symbols as units of the whole and as the unity (wholeness of the equation) for the message to be communicated. This is NOT the usual linear process extracting meaning of a written or spoken sentence.
If I've learned one thing from learning a new philosophy, with its new assumptions, it's that I, for one, won't get anywhere reading it linearly. Since the philosopher has to explain a new sphere of thought via a string of words, it takes me at least two readings, but usually a lot more, often reading the first chapter of several other books, articles on Jstor, various online encyclopedia entries, etc., just to make any good sense of the first chapter of the book I first picked up. It's like making a sculpture, the first reading gives me a rough view of the overall scope and shape. The next few passes fill in many details. Another pass for the refinement. Etc. Only after I've grasped the overall concept of a new philosophy can I can jump to the right conclusions about the meanings (connotations) of the terms and phrases as they're strung along.
-- Matt
----------------------------- 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 .
