I agree with Edwina . Peirce himself left strong indications that some of his finer terminological distinctions were likely to be unimportant for research purposes, which was his main concern.
Always the point was to use his ideas to do empirical work. The kind of article that Edwina links to is a beautiful example of the kind of thing that would have really interested Peirce. I think of Peircean terminology as a beanstalk he planted. It grew far too large in many ways. But the science, the math, the logic, these are the things of true lasting importance. Dan Sent from my iPad > On Mar 30, 2019, at 9:45 AM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > In my view, the basis of Peirce is not which term is to be used when and > where - although I acknowledge that such a descriptive outline can be > fascinating for some - but my view is that Peirce is really 'all about > pragmatics'; i.e., the powerful functionality of his analytic framework when > used in examining and explaining our real world, its operation and our > interactions with that world. This analytic framework - which functions > regardless of the terms used - is, to me, 'the basic Peirce' - and can be of > great insight in many disciplines. > > Here is an example. My minimal computer skills didn't allow me to copy more > than once - so, I've left out the vital title and authors. It's in the online > journal Entropy. The link below should get anyone interested to the site. My > point is NOT to open discussion on the actual article - but to show how the > Peircean analytic framework, which to me, consists of that dynamic triad > [O-R-I] with its subsets and the powerful three categories - is the basic > pragmatic infrastructure of our entire world. > > The article below is about information dynamics - and - note the terms of > 'majority-logic decoding' [another term for 3ns???], and 'single unit > transformations' [2ns???]...and entropy [1ns??] ….And non-equilibrium > dynamics [the triadic semiosic process??] > > ""We investigate the performance of majority-logic decoding in both > reversible and finite-time information erasure processes performed on > macroscopic bits that contain N microscopic binary units. While we show that > for reversible erasure protocols single-unit transformations are more > efficient than majority-logic decoding, the latter is found to offer several > benefits for finite-time erasure processes: Both the minimal erasure duration > for a given erasure and the minimal erasure error for a given erasure > duration are reduced, if compared to a single unit. Remarkably, the > majority-logic decoding is also more efficient in both the small-erasure > error and fast-erasure region. These benefits are also preserved under the > optimal erasure protocol that minimizes the dissipated heat. Our work > therefore shows that majority-logic decoding can lift the > precision-speed-efficiency trade-off in information erasure processes. View > Full-Text > > Keywords: finite-time information erasure; majority-logic decoding; > nonequilibrium thermodynamics > > Edwina > > > ----------------------------- > 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 .
