List, John: > On Mar 12, 2019, at 7:41 AM, John F Sowa <[email protected]> wrote: > > Anything can be classified in an open-ended variety of ways for an > open-ended variety of reasons.
This remark is rather strange for scientific pragmaticism. How one forms categories of thought is an extremely important issue that CSP addressed in many ways and from many radically different perspectives. The immense surprise of “Bedrock” paper re-opens the questions about the role of a subset of chemistry (organic chemistry) in categorizations. I recall a slide in one of your slide packs that contrasts the CSP signs within(?) the meanings of the Universal quantifiers and the Existential Quantifiers of set theory. Is this assertion related to that re-classification of CSP symbols? (I was not able to re-locate this particular slide / slide deck, so I can not place it is context.) Can you re-post the link to this slide? 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 .
