Jerry C., List: I must confess, I do not understand what specific point you are trying to make with this response; please elaborate/clarify.
To supplement my previous comments--surprise and suspicion are not part of the reasoning itself; i.e., not included within the syllogism. Surprise (at the observation of fact C) corresponds to the irritation of doubt that prompts an inquiry in the first place. Suspicion (that A explains C) corresponds to the fixation of belief that is the aim of inquiry and brings it to an end, at least provisionally and for the time being. Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 9:08 AM, Jerry LR Chandler < [email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 24, 2016, at 8:43 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > then the syllogism looks like this. > > A = X is Y. > R = Y is Z. > C = X is Z. > > Really? > > Perhaps you mean that the conclusion you seek can be reached by this > clear, distinct and logical expression of your ideas. > > Cheers > > Jerry >
----------------------------- 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 .
