> On Apr 29, 2016, at 7:29 AM, Jerry LR Chandler <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> It is a fact that the natural sciences use several notational systems to 
> express the consequences of inquiries.  These notational systems use 
> different meanings of symbols in order to create a coherent (logical, 
> mathematical) expression of beliefs about relations within nature.  (Consider 
> the symbolization of time in physics, chemistry and music!)
> 
> Yet, there is an intrinsic unity to the experience of time itself (if it has 
> a self!)

Again I think a big issue is the issue of translation. The various notational 
symbols can be translated between. We pick one more due to ease of some 
problems and due to historical reasons. In a somewhat similar fashion a 
physicist will choose to solve a problem in mechanics or quantum mechanics 
using particle (Newtonian) models, conservation of energy models, lagrangian 
models, or hamiltonian like models primarily based upon convenience. It’s the 
ability to translate between conceptual models that’s important. This becomes 
even more true when we abstract farther and use tensor formulations and convert 
our metric tensor to choose an appropriate coordinate system.

This might just reflect my biases, but I think the notion of translation is key 
to thinking through a lot of these issues. Not just notational systems where we 
have a basic isomophism but even the issue of translating between systems that 
we can’t get a true 1:1 translation.

> Why do you believe that: 
> 
>> While none of these are in the Peircean arena, I think they fit in rather 
>> well. (Inquiry as a continual generation of higher metalanguage in terms of 
>> semiosis)
> 
> ?

The expansion of the system being inquiry? I’ll admit that I’m somewhat here 
following how Derrida appropriates Peirce and Gödel. And again, I take the 
minority reading of Derrida as a realism rather than as a relativist and 
nihilist. (Although I think it’s quite easy to argue for that position)

I think this is basically just Peirce’s concept of evolutionary sign.


-----------------------------
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