List, Helmut:
> On Dec 22, 2017, at 11:36 AM, Helmut Raulien <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I can imagine, that there are simple relations that donot have parts, but 
> there are also composed relations, that consist of other relations, which are 
> their parts (given that I may use the term "parts" in this functional way, 
> but maybe not, this still has got to be discussed, or is already, 

My response is very simple rhetoric.

A relation is a unity in the sense of my earlier assertion, some months ago:

"The union of units unifies the unity."

I concurred with John’s assertion because a questioner may be familiar with the 
logic of the meaning the term “relation” in only one symbol system. (Monadic 
symbol users appear to prevail on this list.)

The definition of part-whole relations varies between disciplines - human 
relations, biological relations, chemical relations, physical relations, 
mathematical relations, etc.

The rhetoric of the meaning of the assertion:

"The union of units unifies the unity.”

depends on the capacity of the questioner to interpret the rhetoric in which I 
frame the meaning of “union” and the corresponding relational logic of  “units.”

More precisely, in preparing my answer to the questioner, I must decide to 
either include or exclude the concept of emergence between logical symbol 
systems. In other words, the rhetoric of music relations differs from the 
rhetoric of chemical relations even though both musical and chemical  relations 
can be illustrated with associations of the union of number units and 
compositions of parts to form wholes (unities.)


See CP 1:288-299 for relevant discussion of valencies relevant to symbols.  CSP 
fully recognized that the mathematization of science is a deep metaphysical 
challenge, not merely a rhetorical flourish asserting that the valencies 
loosely associated with the Laws of Physics suffice to explain all of science.  
He held that the example of “handedness” as chiral molecules sufficed for this 
purpose.(EP2:159)

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 .




Reply via email to