Re: [PEIRCE-L] Cuts are out. Tinctures are in.
John, List: In the first passage that you quoted from R L376, I agree that Peirce is primarily condemning cuts, not tinctures. However, he is also condemning his *entire *55-page description of EGs in "Prolegomena to an Apology for Pragmaticism"--that is the total length of the article as originally published in *The Monist*, which is where he *introduces* the tinctures. Moreover, he explicitly bemoans "my nonsensical 'tinctures' and heraldry" two years later, in a letter addressed to F. A. Woods (R L477, 1913 Nov 8). I will not further belabor the points that I have already made at length about the "many papers." Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 4:37 PM John F Sowa wrote: > I just wanted to clarify some issues that may be unclear in what Peirce > wrote in L376: "in the Monist of Oct. 1906... I made an attempt to make > the syntax cover Modals; but it has not satisfied me. The description was, > on the whole, as bad as it well could be, in great contrast to the one Dr. > Carus rejected. For although the system itself is marked by extreme > simplicity, the description fills 55 pages, and defines over a hundred > technical terms applying to it. The necessity for these was chiefly due to > the lines called “cuts” which simply appear in the present description as > the boundaries of shadings, or shaded parts of the sheet”. > > Many people interpreted this text as implying that Peirce was condemning > the tinctures. But as he said explicitly, it was "chiefly due to the > lines called cuts”, which in 1906 were defined as cuts through the paper > from the recto side to the verso side. The last mention of recto/verso was > in R669 (May 1911). From R670 (June 1911) to the last long letter in 1913, > negative areas were marked by shading, not by cuts. From L231 (June 1911) > to the end, Peirce also avoided the word 'cut'. > > In R670, he also mentioned tinctures as an option: “The nature of the > universe or universes of discourse (for several may be referred to in a > single assertion) in the rather unusual cases in which such precision is > required, is denoted either by using modifications of the heraldic > tinctures, marked in something like the usual manner in pale ink upon the > surface, or by scribing the graphs in colored inks”. > > I'm not discussing these issues as a criticism of anybody. I'm just > clarifying several points: (1) A notation for distinguishing "the universe > or universes of discourse" is important. (2) Tinctures, by themselves, are > not a bad way to express the distinction, but they could not be used in > print in the early 20th C. (3) But methods for distinguishing the UoD are > necessary in any text that happens to mention two or more. (4) This issue > is important for any discussion about L376, because Peirce explicitly > mentioned the division of the phemic sheet into multiple papers, which > might express different opinions by an utterer and an interpreter. (5) In > R670 above and in L376 below, the utterer and interpreter may refer to > different UoDs and discuss entities in them. Those discussions, when > expressed in EGs, would involve lines of identity (or quantified variables) > that refer to universes and to entities in them that may be abstract, > imaginary, possible, or impossible. Note that they may also discuss > "special understandings". An understanding is another* ens rations*, as > Peirce would say. > > From L376; "If 'snows' is scribed upon the Phemic Sheet, it asserts that > in the universe to which a special understanding between utterer and > interpreter has made the special part of the phemic sheet on which it is > scribed to relate, it sometimes does snow. For they two may conceive that > the “phemic sheet” embraces many papers, so that one part of it is before > the common attention at one time and another part at another, and that > actual conventions between them equivalent to scribed graphs make some of > those pieces relate to one subject and part to another”. > > John > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
[PEIRCE-L] Cuts are out. Tinctures are in.
I just wanted to clarify some issues that may be unclear in what Peirce wrote in L376: "in the Monist of Oct. 1906... I made an attempt to make the syntax cover Modals; but it has not satisfied me. The description was, on the whole, as bad as it well could be, in great contrast to the one Dr. Carus rejected. For although the system itself is marked by extreme simplicity, the description fills 55 pages, and defines over a hundred technical terms applying to it. The necessity for these was chiefly due to the lines called “cuts” which simply appear in the present description as the boundaries of shadings, or shaded parts of the sheet”. Many people interpreted this text as implying that Peirce was condemning the tinctures. But as he said explicitly, it was "chiefly due to the lines called cuts”, which in 1906 were defined as cuts through the paper from the recto side to the verso side. The last mention of recto/verso was in R669 (May 1911). From R670 (June 1911) to the last long letter in 1913, negative areas were marked by shading, not by cuts. From L231 (June 1911) to the end, Peirce also avoided the word 'cut'. In R670, he also mentioned tinctures as an option: “The nature of the universe or universes of discourse (for several may be referred to in a single assertion) in the rather unusual cases in which such precision is required, is denoted either by using modifications of the heraldic tinctures, marked in something like the usual manner in pale ink upon the surface, or by scribing the graphs in colored inks”. I'm not discussing these issues as a criticism of anybody. I'm just clarifying several points: (1) A notation for distinguishing "the universe or universes of discourse" is important. (2) Tinctures, by themselves, are not a bad way to express the distinction, but they could not be used in print in the early 20th C. (3) But methods for distinguishing the UoD are necessary in any text that happens to mention two or more. (4) This issue is important for any discussion about L376, because Peirce explicitly mentioned the division of the phemic sheet into multiple papers, which might express different opinions by an utterer and an interpreter. (5) In R670 above and in L376 below, the utterer and interpreter may refer to different UoDs and discuss entities in them. Those discussions, when expressed in EGs, would involve lines of identity (or quantified variables) that refer to universes and to entities in them that may be abstract, imaginary, possible, or impossible. Note that they may also discuss "special understandings". An understanding is another ens rations, as Peirce would say. >From L376; "If 'snows' is scribed upon the Phemic Sheet, it asserts that in >the universe to which a special understanding between utterer and interpreter >has made the special part of the phemic sheet on which it is scribed to >relate, it sometimes does snow. For they two may conceive that the “phemic >sheet” embraces many papers, so that one part of it is before the common >attention at one time and another part at another, and that actual conventions >between them equivalent to scribed graphs make some of those pieces relate to >one subject and part to another”. John _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
[PEIRCE-L] CfP - 1st Pan African Logic Congress - Cairo, Egypt, April 28-30, 2024
-- Deadline Extension: March 31st - 1st Pan African Logic Congress The logic of nature & the nature of logic in Africa April 28–30, 2024 - The British University in Egypt, Cairo This congress aims to promote logic in Africa. It is focused on Nature in a double sense. Wildlife is very important in Africa, the flora and fauna are very impressive. This is the place where there is the highest number and variety of animals. And for this reason, the people especially in central Africa have a strong connection with nature. It is the opportunity therefore to reflect on the logic of nature and to examine to what extent it is different from the logic of the technological and industrial world (computers, artificial intelligence, and so on). This is a way therefore to challenge the very nature of logic. From this perspective, logic is understood in a very wide sense and in relation to all aspects of the world, natural and artificial. The purpose of this event is to reveal and explore different manners of reasoning embedded in African cults, myths, arts, religions, rituals, economic systems, traditional justice systems, and architectural systems. This congress will enrich logical studies and their relative subjects like AI through elaborating logical interpretations of different aspects of African cultures. Deadline for submission of an abstract for presenting a talk: March 31st, 2024 https://africanlogiccongress.com/ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
