List, All:

Peirce's system of Existential Graphs (EG) has two main parts, Alpha for
propositional logic and Beta for first-order predicate logic. He explores a
Gamma part for aspects of modal logic, but later assigns that name instead
to Beta with shading rather than cuts for distinguishing a universe of
possibility from the universe of actuality (CP 4.576-581, 1906). This means
that he must "add a *Delta* part in order to deal with modals" (RL 376, R
500:3, 1911 Dec 6), but he apparently never takes any further steps in that
direction.

The sheet represents existence in EG and the entire continuum of reality in
my proposed system of Synechistic Graphs (SG). Alpha graphs, typically
scribed as single capital letters, therefore signify states of things that
are individual in EG and general in SG. On the other hand, the constituent
parts of Beta graphs in *both* EG and SG stand for that which is general,
at least to some degree, in accordance with one of Peirce's early logical
insights.

CSP: The absolute individual can not only not be realized in sense or
thought, but cannot exist, properly speaking. ... All, therefore, that we
perceive or think, or that exists, is general. ... That which exists is the
object of a true conception. This conception may be made more determinate
than any assignable conception; and therefore it is never so determinate
that it is capable of no further determination. (CP 3.93n, 1870)


This applies even to proper names like "the second Philip of Macedon" (CP
3.93). Surprisingly, Peirce nevertheless claims decades later to be having
trouble figuring out how to include general objects in EG.

CSP: The operation of hypostatic abstraction consists in substituting for
any predication that of possessing a quality, or that of standing in a
relation. ... The hypostatically abstract quality or relation is
necessarily general, that is, is not subject to the principle of excluded
middle. The universe of characters is thereby quite outside the universe of
existents. ...
A hypostatical abstract is an object whose being consists in the
possibility of a predicate and which stands in a peculiar relation, that of
being possessed by, to whatever there may be of what that predicate is true.
I have not yet discovered a suitable mode of representing such objects in
existential graphs. (RS 145(s):23&26-27, LF 1:513-514, 1905)


On the contrary, it seems clear to me that in Beta graph-instances, the
written names *symbolically* represent general concepts and thus "afford
the means of thinking about thoughts in ways in which we could not
otherwise think of them. They enable us, for example, to create
Abstractions" (CP 4.531, 1906). Evidently Peirce did not interpret EG that
way, at least not before recognizing the role of "continuous relations" (R
611:8-10[13-15], 1908 Oct 28) or "pure predicates" (NEM 3:885-886, 1908 Dec
5) or "continuous predicates" (SS 70-72, 1908 Dec 14), which are signified
by the syntax alone. They correspond to each attachment of a name to a
heavily drawn line of identity, which denotes an object in the universe of
discourse.

CSP: What I mean is that the sign "A is red" can be decomposed so as to
separate "is red" into a Copulative and a Descriptive, thus: "A possesses
the character of redness." But if we attempt to analyze "possesses the
character" in like manner, we get "A possesses the character of the
possession of the character of Redness"; and so on *ad infinitum*. (CP
8.352, EP 2:485, 1908 Dec 25)


In this approach, every name or line is a different *subject* of the
proposition, "that with which some collateral acquaintance is requisite to
the interpretation" (SS 70). For example, although the sentence "Cain kills
Abel" consists of only three words, it is diagrammed as having five logical
subjects--the names "Cain," "killing," and "Abel" for three concepts, plus
the lines between them for two indefinite objects such that the complete
translation is "something possessing the character of Cain stands in the
relation of killing to something possessing the character of Abel." Peirce
calls this "the proper way in logic" (NEM 3:885) because "when we have
carried analysis so far as to leave only a continuous predicate, we have
carried it to its ultimate elements" (SS 72).

In any case, that is how I interpret Beta graphs in SG. In accordance with
Peirce's contemporaneous taxonomy of sign classes, the names are
descriptive abstractives, the lines are designative concretives, and the
"continuants" relating them to each other--including the sheet itself for
conjunction, along with any scrolls for disjunction and implication--are
copulative collectives (CP 8.349-375, EP 2:484-490, 1908 Dec 25). Moreover,
although each line *indexically* denotes an object, it also *iconically*
signifies that it is general--not just continuous, but also capable of
further determination since there is always room to add another branch for
attaching another name. Peirce himself recognizes this aspect.

CSP: Since no perfectly determinate proposition is possible, there is one
more reform that needs to be made in the system of existential graphs.
Namely, the line of identity must be totally abolished, or rather must be
understood quite differently. We must hereafter understand it to be
*potentially* the graph of *teridentity* by which means there always will
virtually be at least one loose end in every graph. In fact, it will not be
truly a graph of *teridentity* but a graph of indefinitely multiple
identity. (CP 4.583, 1906)


The upshot is that SG, like EG from which it is adapted, "enables us to
carry the logical analysis of terms, propositions, and arguments to the
furthest point possible in the nature of things" (R 296:7-8, 1908). What
remains to be discussed is the *meaning* of a general concept as
represented by a name, which is what Peirce's pragmatism--i.e.,
pragmaticism--purports to establish.

Regards,

Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of 
the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Reply via email to