Jerry, Jon, list,
In CP3.469 (1897), Peirce gives a diagram of the ammonia molecule which simply shows that the nitrogen ion has a valence of three, hence the formula NH3. He compares it to a predicate which takes three subjects. So we have two diagrams with three “spokes” each How else would you diagram that valency relationship? This valency diagram is obviously NOT a diagram of a triadic relation such as sign-object-interpretant, nor was it intended to be one. By the way, since Jon’s diagram is nothing like an Existential Graph, I don’t know why Jon refers to the central unit in it as a “spot.” Peirce uses that term only in the context of Existential Graphs, which are also not diagrams of the sign-object-interpretant relation. Gary f. -----Original Message----- From: Jerry LR Chandler [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 5-Apr-16 00:24 To: Peirce List <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Systems Of Interpretation Jon, John: Thanks, Jon. The question I raised was in order to seek alternative interpretations of CSP’s diagram of a chemical structure, ammonia. (NH3) He showed it as a triad. The nitrogen atom was in the middle of the three hydrogens, each at the end of a spoke. NOT a triangle. But, the chemical atoms are all of the nature and co-exist as relatives. So, four atoms but only a triad. Why? My feeling is that CSP wanted a triad so that he made one. This is not a satisfactory inquiry into a diagrammatic assertion. Cheers Jerry > On Apr 3, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Jon Awbrey < <mailto:[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > > Peircers, > > Questions about the meaning of the “central hub” in the “three-spoked” > picture of an elementary sign relation have often come up, just > recently among Jerry Chandler's questions and a question Mary Libertin > asked on my blog. > Maybe the answer I gave there can help to clear that up: > > <http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2016/03/31/systems-of-interpretation-%E2> > http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2016/03/31/systems-of-interpretation-%E2 > %80%A2-5/#comment-32800 > > The central “spot”, as Peirce called it [in his logical graphs], is > located on a different logical plane, since it is really a > place-holder for the whole sign relation or possibly for the > individual triple. Normally I would have labeled it with a letter to > indicate the whole sign relation, say L, or else the individual > triple, say ℓ = (o, s, i). > > Regards, > > Jon >
----------------------------- 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 .
