List, JAS, First, thank you Jon for the reference to J K Sheriff’s work.
His table of relations among the triadic triples is rather cute. Cute, but hardly compelling. But, his attempt to constrain the triadic triples to both columns and rows seems ill-advised from the perspective of logic. The potential formal logical nature of the triadic triple seems to be excluded from this (Sheriff) perspectives of the categorization of nine terms. In particular, in my interpretation of the table, the bottom right corner of the matrix, which CSP labels as “argument”, infers the purpose of the matrix is to construct a material proposition that may be True or False, and which is true if and only if it is compossible into a symbol that represents the legisign. The generalized question is whether or not a thirdnesses of representation (Rhema) maps to the thirdnesses of legi-signs. Would you like to opine on this particular form (or proform?) of categorization? JFS has subsequently noted (on Nov. 2, 2018) "For EGs, Peirce used the terms monad, dyad, triad, tetrad, pentad... He also showed that relations with more than 3 "logical subjects" could be defined in terms of relations with 3 or less. He also observed that a proposition or dicent sign is a medad.” CSP associates the “matrix of terms of the triadic triple with the relationships to blanks in propositional space. It appears to me that Sheriff misses this vital concept in the composition of his interpretation of the triadic triple. (I cite JFS paragraph merely for convenience of time.) I will offer my own interpretation in a later post, which will differ sharply from JFS categorization of the triadic triple. I plan to connect the triadic triple to the composition of arguments, using a schema of reasoning that is consistent with modern scientific diagrammatic reasoning over the matrix of the nine terms. I will seek to include a reason for developing the generative notion of abductive logic. Cheers Jerry > On Oct 31, 2018, at 2:34 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Jerry C., List: > > As I have said before, I do not have John Sowa's book. I suppose that I > could request it via Interlibrary Loan, but it would take at least a few days > to get to me. I will ask again--could you (or John himself) please post an > image of Figure 6.14, so that I can better understand what you mean by "any > complete schema for addressing all nine terms of the triple triad in a > coherent narrative"? Does this table from a 1981 paper by John K. Sheriff, > "Charles S. Peirce and the Semiotics of Literature," perhaps fit the bill? > > <image.png> > > It also appeared in his 1994 book, Charles Peirce's Guess at the Riddle. > > 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 Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 9:23 PM Jerry LR Chandler > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > List, JonAS: > > Shortly after you posted this message, I departed on an extended business > trip and sort of dropped out of this discussion. Recent thoughts bring me > back around to these questions from a different and I believe, a better > grounded perspective on the grammar of the triple triad. > > The specific triple triad that I am referring too is as follows: > > Qualisign Sinsign Legisign > Icon Index Symbol > Rhema Dicisign Argument > > Over the past two decades, inquiries into these nine terms have resulted in > multiple “back and forths” among list members. Often, these posts have > included two or three or four of these terms and there interrelated meanings > and associated grammatical renderings. > > In one exceptional case, John Sowa has opened new territory by presenting a > detailed narrative that related all nine terms. This is in Figure 6.14 of his > book, Knowledge Representation (2000). The book is directed toward > Artificial Intelligence students as well as others. One should also note Gary > R.s schema is somehow related to this issue. > > Several years ago, I posted to this list serve, a narrative that was coherent > for four of the nine terms, > > Qualisign Sinsign > Icon Index > > I now have reason to believe that this is only partially correct with respect > to CSP’s views on material propositions. > > The following open question is addressed to all list members. > > Is anyone aware of any complete schema for addressing all nine terms of the > triple triad in a coherent narrative? > > This is a (rather superficial) search is for any published or un-published > schema. If anyone has unpublished versions that they wish to keep private, > please respond to my private email and I will respect your confidentiality. > > To re-iterate, has anyone else besides John Sowa developed a coherent view of > CSP triple triad? > > 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 . > > > >
----------------------------- 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 .
