John, List:
JFS: For teaching Peirce's semiotic, I therefore recommend that
those five words should be replaced with terms that CSP himself used:
mark, token, type;
icon, index, symbol;
predicate, proposition, argument.
I have no problem with mark/token/type, but "predicate" and
"proposition" usually designate symbols. What would be some examples
of a predicate that is an icon or an index, or a proposition that is
an index? Demonstrative pronouns like "this" or "that" are usually
classified as rhematic indexical legisigns, but it seems odd to call
them "predicates" when their only function is to pick out subjects.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt
<http://www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> -
twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt <http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Stephen C. Rose <stever...@gmail.com
<mailto:stever...@gmail.com>> wrote:
This is a salient post. I think icon, index, symbol is the most
useful of the nominated survivors though my own adaptation reality
ethics aesthetics suits me as a sort of every-person triad for use
in a daily discipline of conscious thinking which is what I have
been working to put forward. I think "triadic thinking" is also a
perfectly good term to set against binary thinking.
amazon.com/author/stephenrose <http://amazon.com/author/stephenrose>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:23 PM, John F Sowa <s...@bestweb.net
<mailto:s...@bestweb.net>> wrote:
On 2/8/2017 12:31 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote:
The three triads of CSP,
qualisign, sinsign, legisign;
icon, index, symbol;
rhema, dicisign, argument,
can be, in my opinion, a “recipe” for realism; that is,
the logical
association of antecedent observations (Qualisigns with
logical
consequences (legisigns)) What I find exceedingly curious
about the
(strange) words of this table is that only the last word,
“argument” is
used in logic. The other eight words are merely dictionary
words.
Clearly, some similarity with 21 st Century AI exists in
these three
19th Century triads.
I have discussed, written about, and lectured on Peirce's semiotic
to various audiences -- mostly in AI and cognitive science. His
terminology is indeed a deterrent for many people.
One wonders why CSP’s three triads have not been adopted.
The words qualisign, sinsign, legisign, rhema, and dicisign have
no chance of being accepted. Even Peirce scholars use them only
when discussing Peirce's writings.
The triad of icon, index, and symbol is the most widely
recognized,
cited, and used -- partly because the words are more common.
Peirce's
terms 'type' and 'token' are widely used even by people who
have no
idea where they came from. And the words 'predicate' and
'proposition'
are common in logic.
For teaching Peirce's semiotic, I therefore recommend that those
five words should be replaced with terms that CSP himself used:
mark, token, type;
icon, index, symbol;
predicate, proposition, argument.
See Figure 2, page 5 of "Signs and reality":
http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/signs.pdf
<http://www.jfsowa.com/pubs/signs.pdf>
For example, consider an index of species.
Is it real?
Or, ideal?
For both a nominalist and a realist, an index is something
observable: a pointing finger, a pronoun in speech or writing,
or a physical occurrence of some kind.
But a species is a type, which is determined by some law
of nature. A realist would say that the law is real.
But a nominalist would say that a law is merely a pattern
of words that summarize some observational data.
In short, both nominalists and realists could use the nine
terms above in practical applications. They would often
reach the same conclusions, but they would disagree about
the existence of referents for the words in the third column.
John
