Re: [PEIRCE-L] Question about Boole’s An Investigation of the Laws of Thought

[pragmaticist . logos]

Janet,

Excellent, thank you for this. It seems more likely to me now that a 
digitization process somewhere along the way introduced the new errors.

With gratitude,
Franklin

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 11, 2022, at 1:01 AM, Janet Singer  wrote:
> 
> 
> Franklin,
> The two errors you noted are not in the Dover copy — see attached.
> 
>> On Jan 10, 2022, at 5:52 PM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>> As a follow up, I would love to get a good hardcopy, but I am now wary of 
>> newer printed editions. If you have a chance, might you check a couple of 
>> pages in your Dover hardcopy? I am attaching screenshots of the pages from 
>> my hardcopy. The first is in Ch VI, just past halfway through the chapter, 
>> and the second is in Ch VII, near the beginning of the chapter.
>> 
>> These are not the only errors I found, but I think confirming these two 
>> errors will serve as sufficient evidence regarding the fidelity of the Dover 
>> edition to the original. So if these errors are not in your Dover copy, then 
>> I can try for a copy of that. If they’re already present in that Dover copy, 
>> I should probably give up hope on any editions published after 1958.
>> 
>> I would be no grateful for your help.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Franklin Ransom
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Jan 10, 2022, at 7:53 PM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> 
>>> This note is also in my hardcopy. The errors to which I refer are not 
>>> these, but new ones apparently produced due to the digitization process.
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
 On Jan 10, 2022, at 4:21 PM, Janet Singer  wrote:
 
 
 The 1958 Dover hardcopy makes these references to errors in the original:
 
 “This Dover edition, first published in 1958, is the first American 
 printing of the work originally published by Macmillan in 1854, with all 
 corrections made within the text.” 
 
>> 
 
 
> On Jan 10, 2022, at 7:46 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> List,
> 
> After receiving an off-list suggestion to pick up an introduction to 
> symbolic logic and use Wikipedia as a resource, it will be well for me to 
> clarify that I am quite familiar with symbolic logic, having mastered 
> sentential logic and predicate calculus, dabbled in modal logic, and 
> gotten to be familiar with Peirce’s graphical logic. The purpose of 
> understanding Boole’s work is not to learn symbolic logic—which is in 
> fact quite different in many respects from Boolean calculus—but 
> specifically to understand better the genesis of Peirce’s work in logic, 
> which I take to be a broader and deeper conception of logic than one 
> finds in studies of symbolic logic.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Franklin Ransom
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jan 10, 2022, at 12:03 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hello list,
>> 
>> It has been some years since I lasted posted, and I have only been 
>> lurking ever since.
>> 
>> I am hoping to get some advice on reading George Boole’s An 
>> Investigation of the Laws of Thought. This is a text which CS Peirce 
>> references in his earlier logical work, and I was hoping to follow along 
>> Peirce’s early work by understanding what he used as a basis for 
>> developing his own ideas.
>> 
>> I’ve had some difficulty though in trying to decipher Boole’s work. His 
>> earlier essay on his work I was able to get through, but the book proves 
>> more challenging. At first I tried an online PDF, but what I found had 
>> noticeable typos, the sort of thing one really wants to avoid in a work 
>> using a lot of abstract symbols.
>> 
>> So some years ago I acquired a hard copy of the currently printed 
>> version from Watchmaker Publishing, but found the book still having 
>> typos. This is rather frustrating, as they’ve had over a century and a 
>> half to get it right. I suspect it has to do with digitization of the 
>> book and then publishing the latest hard copy based on this poor 
>> digitization. After trying for a couple years to get through it, I 
>> decided I couldn’t figure out if it was due to typos that I don’t know 
>> are typos, or simply inability to comprehend on my part, that has kept 
>> me from being able to interpret the work successfully.
>> 
>> So what I’d like to know is if there are possibly any publications on 
>> Boole’s work, hopefully in relation to Peirce’s early logical work 
>> extending the Boolean calculus, that might assist me in finally getting 
>> through Boole’s book. Any advice or suggestions in regard to this matter 
>> will be appreciated.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Franklin Ransom
>> Sent from my iPhone
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Question about Boole’s An Investigation of the Laws of Thought

[Ben Udell]

Wow, and I found those multiple copies in Google books, only the 1854 
1st edition but many copies.  I assumed that the errors were in those 
1st editions and that you had found them.


Well, maybe you can find more clues in a search on "Boole" in the 
collection _Studies in the Logic of Charles Sanders Peirce_


https://books.google.com/books?id=pWjOg-zbtMAC=Boole=false#v=snippet=Boole=false 



I wish I had more expertise but the only advice that I can offer is, in 
doing a Google search, to put quote marks around the name "Peirce".


Best, Ben

On 1/10/2022 8:22 PM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:

List,

I was just able to find an original copy of the book scanned into Google Books, 
and it is indeed free of the typographical errors found in recent editions such 
as my Watchmaker Publishing copy and in the version on Project Gutenberg. 
Several years ago it was not available on Google Books, which is why I had not 
been able to pursue this method at that time. So I now have the original text 
and can move on without those new errors.

It would still be helpful if anyone has advice or suggestions in regard to 
reading Boole’s work, particularly with an eye to Peirce’s work, but not 
necessarily. I have noted that the algebra in the book seems somewhat different 
from present day algebra, so perhaps some suggested reading on 18th or early 
19th century algebra might prove helpful.

Sincerely,
Franklin Ransom

Sent from my iPhone


On Jan 10, 2022, at 10:46 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:

List,

After receiving an off-list suggestion to pick up an introduction to symbolic 
logic and use Wikipedia as a resource, it will be well for me to clarify that I 
am quite familiar with symbolic logic, having mastered sentential logic and 
predicate calculus, dabbled in modal logic, and gotten to be familiar with 
Peirce’s graphical logic. The purpose of understanding Boole’s work is not to 
learn symbolic logic—which is in fact quite different in many respects from 
Boolean calculus—but specifically to understand better the genesis of Peirce’s 
work in logic, which I take to be a broader and deeper conception of logic than 
one finds in studies of symbolic logic.

Sincerely,
Franklin Ransom

Sent from my iPhone


On Jan 10, 2022, at 12:03 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:


Hello list,

It has been some years since I lasted posted, and I have only been lurking ever 
since.

I am hoping to get some advice on reading George Boole’s An Investigation of 
the Laws of Thought. This is a text which CS Peirce references in his earlier 
logical work, and I was hoping to follow along Peirce’s early work by 
understanding what he used as a basis for developing his own ideas.

I’ve had some difficulty though in trying to decipher Boole’s work. His earlier 
essay on his work I was able to get through, but the book proves more 
challenging. At first I tried an online PDF, but what I found had noticeable 
typos, the sort of thing one really wants to avoid in a work using a lot of 
abstract symbols.

So some years ago I acquired a hard copy of the currently printed version from 
Watchmaker Publishing, but found the book still having typos. This is rather 
frustrating, as they’ve had over a century and a half to get it right. I 
suspect it has to do with digitization of the book and then publishing the 
latest hard copy based on this poor digitization. After trying for a couple 
years to get through it, I decided I couldn’t figure out if it was due to typos 
that I don’t know are typos, or simply inability to comprehend on my part, that 
has kept me from being able to interpret the work successfully.

So what I’d like to know is if there are possibly any publications on Boole’s 
work, hopefully in relation to Peirce’s early logical work extending the 
Boolean calculus, that might assist me in finally getting through Boole’s book. 
Any advice or suggestions in regard to this matter will be appreciated.

Sincerely,
Franklin Ransom
Sent from my iPhone

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 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 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Question about Boole’s An Investigation of the Laws of Thought

[pragmaticist . logos]

List,

I was just able to find an original copy of the book scanned into Google Books, 
and it is indeed free of the typographical errors found in recent editions such 
as my Watchmaker Publishing copy and in the version on Project Gutenberg. 
Several years ago it was not available on Google Books, which is why I had not 
been able to pursue this method at that time. So I now have the original text 
and can move on without those new errors.

It would still be helpful if anyone has advice or suggestions in regard to 
reading Boole’s work, particularly with an eye to Peirce’s work, but not 
necessarily. I have noted that the algebra in the book seems somewhat different 
from present day algebra, so perhaps some suggested reading on 18th or early 
19th century algebra might prove helpful.

Sincerely,
Franklin Ransom

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 10, 2022, at 10:46 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> List,
> 
> After receiving an off-list suggestion to pick up an introduction to symbolic 
> logic and use Wikipedia as a resource, it will be well for me to clarify that 
> I am quite familiar with symbolic logic, having mastered sentential logic and 
> predicate calculus, dabbled in modal logic, and gotten to be familiar with 
> Peirce’s graphical logic. The purpose of understanding Boole’s work is not to 
> learn symbolic logic—which is in fact quite different in many respects from 
> Boolean calculus—but specifically to understand better the genesis of 
> Peirce’s work in logic, which I take to be a broader and deeper conception of 
> logic than one finds in studies of symbolic logic.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Franklin Ransom
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Jan 10, 2022, at 12:03 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hello list,
>> 
>> It has been some years since I lasted posted, and I have only been lurking 
>> ever since.
>> 
>> I am hoping to get some advice on reading George Boole’s An Investigation of 
>> the Laws of Thought. This is a text which CS Peirce references in his 
>> earlier logical work, and I was hoping to follow along Peirce’s early work 
>> by understanding what he used as a basis for developing his own ideas.
>> 
>> I’ve had some difficulty though in trying to decipher Boole’s work. His 
>> earlier essay on his work I was able to get through, but the book proves 
>> more challenging. At first I tried an online PDF, but what I found had 
>> noticeable typos, the sort of thing one really wants to avoid in a work 
>> using a lot of abstract symbols.
>> 
>> So some years ago I acquired a hard copy of the currently printed version 
>> from Watchmaker Publishing, but found the book still having typos. This is 
>> rather frustrating, as they’ve had over a century and a half to get it 
>> right. I suspect it has to do with digitization of the book and then 
>> publishing the latest hard copy based on this poor digitization. After 
>> trying for a couple years to get through it, I decided I couldn’t figure out 
>> if it was due to typos that I don’t know are typos, or simply inability to 
>> comprehend on my part, that has kept me from being able to interpret the 
>> work successfully.
>> 
>> So what I’d like to know is if there are possibly any publications on 
>> Boole’s work, hopefully in relation to Peirce’s early logical work extending 
>> the Boolean calculus, that might assist me in finally getting through 
>> Boole’s book. Any advice or suggestions in regard to this matter will be 
>> appreciated.
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Franklin Ransom
>> Sent from my iPhone
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Question about Boole’s An Investigation of the Laws of Thought

[Jerry Rhee]

Dear Franklin, list,


It is walking on landmines to figure out someone else’s intention and
deliver your opinion out loud in public

*as if *your opinion is the only one that is correct.

However, if your purpose is, “to understand better the genesis of Peirce’s
work in logic”,

then you could always just ask him, but, as we say, ‘he is safely dead’.


If that is not enough for you, then check out Amirouche Moktefi’s
presentation here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSmdpsaMvXg


21:00

“If by modern, we mean what we are doing today,

so what we are doing comes from there,

- we could do that, of course.

But then, I’m not doing history, what we are doing is.. heritage-

It’s the idea that you are looking for the advancement of the discipline.

How advanced is it.


So, we would say, for instance,

‘Given what we are doing today, Frege was the most advanced in 1879’.

Meaning that it is the closest to what we are doing.

That’s the top.

And then, you can search for the next step..

We don’t have historical moments but historical steps.


But if you want to know how logic was in 1879,

..  if you’re interested in the state of logic.. How was logic in 1879?..

What were all the other people doing?”


For instance.. and he gives examples, including situating Boole beginning
at ~35:15,

introducing Peirce at 38:20

and Ladd-Franklin at 38:45, who is not developing Peirce’s system.


“She is introducing her own system.

‘There are in existence, five.  I propose to add one more to the number.’


The whole idea here is that you have a lot of different logicians
introducing different systems.

Now how do they compare their methods?

It’s very simple..

You apply them on the same problem,  (cf, slide at 40:00)

and show how their method works best.”


I hope that helps.

With best wishes,

Jerry R

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 9:46 AM  wrote:

> List,
>
> After receiving an off-list suggestion to pick up an introduction to
> symbolic logic and use Wikipedia as a resource, it will be well for me to
> clarify that I am quite familiar with symbolic logic, having mastered
> sentential logic and predicate calculus, dabbled in modal logic, and gotten
> to be familiar with Peirce’s graphical logic. The purpose of understanding
> Boole’s work is not to learn symbolic logic—which is in fact quite
> different in many respects from Boolean calculus—but specifically to
> understand better the genesis of Peirce’s work in logic, which I take to be
> a broader and deeper conception of logic than one finds in studies of
> symbolic logic.
>
> Sincerely,
> Franklin Ransom
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jan 10, 2022, at 12:03 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > 
> > Hello list,
> >
> > It has been some years since I lasted posted, and I have only been
> lurking ever since.
> >
> > I am hoping to get some advice on reading George Boole’s An
> Investigation of the Laws of Thought. This is a text which CS Peirce
> references in his earlier logical work, and I was hoping to follow along
> Peirce’s early work by understanding what he used as a basis for developing
> his own ideas.
> >
> > I’ve had some difficulty though in trying to decipher Boole’s work. His
> earlier essay on his work I was able to get through, but the book proves
> more challenging. At first I tried an online PDF, but what I found had
> noticeable typos, the sort of thing one really wants to avoid in a work
> using a lot of abstract symbols.
> >
> > So some years ago I acquired a hard copy of the currently printed
> version from Watchmaker Publishing, but found the book still having typos.
> This is rather frustrating, as they’ve had over a century and a half to get
> it right. I suspect it has to do with digitization of the book and then
> publishing the latest hard copy based on this poor digitization. After
> trying for a couple years to get through it, I decided I couldn’t figure
> out if it was due to typos that I don’t know are typos, or simply inability
> to comprehend on my part, that has kept me from being able to interpret the
> work successfully.
> >
> > So what I’d like to know is if there are possibly any publications on
> Boole’s work, hopefully in relation to Peirce’s early logical work
> extending the Boolean calculus, that might assist me in finally getting
> through Boole’s book. Any advice or suggestions in regard to this matter
> will be appreciated.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Franklin Ransom
> > Sent from my iPhone
> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
> ► 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.
>
_ _ 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Question about Boole’s An Investigation of the Laws of Thought

[pragmaticist . logos]

List,

After receiving an off-list suggestion to pick up an introduction to symbolic 
logic and use Wikipedia as a resource, it will be well for me to clarify that I 
am quite familiar with symbolic logic, having mastered sentential logic and 
predicate calculus, dabbled in modal logic, and gotten to be familiar with 
Peirce’s graphical logic. The purpose of understanding Boole’s work is not to 
learn symbolic logic—which is in fact quite different in many respects from 
Boolean calculus—but specifically to understand better the genesis of Peirce’s 
work in logic, which I take to be a broader and deeper conception of logic than 
one finds in studies of symbolic logic.

Sincerely,
Franklin Ransom

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 10, 2022, at 12:03 AM, pragmaticist.lo...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello list,
> 
> It has been some years since I lasted posted, and I have only been lurking 
> ever since.
> 
> I am hoping to get some advice on reading George Boole’s An Investigation of 
> the Laws of Thought. This is a text which CS Peirce references in his earlier 
> logical work, and I was hoping to follow along Peirce’s early work by 
> understanding what he used as a basis for developing his own ideas.
> 
> I’ve had some difficulty though in trying to decipher Boole’s work. His 
> earlier essay on his work I was able to get through, but the book proves more 
> challenging. At first I tried an online PDF, but what I found had noticeable 
> typos, the sort of thing one really wants to avoid in a work using a lot of 
> abstract symbols.
> 
> So some years ago I acquired a hard copy of the currently printed version 
> from Watchmaker Publishing, but found the book still having typos. This is 
> rather frustrating, as they’ve had over a century and a half to get it right. 
> I suspect it has to do with digitization of the book and then publishing the 
> latest hard copy based on this poor digitization. After trying for a couple 
> years to get through it, I decided I couldn’t figure out if it was due to 
> typos that I don’t know are typos, or simply inability to comprehend on my 
> part, that has kept me from being able to interpret the work successfully.
> 
> So what I’d like to know is if there are possibly any publications on Boole’s 
> work, hopefully in relation to Peirce’s early logical work extending the 
> Boolean calculus, that might assist me in finally getting through Boole’s 
> book. Any advice or suggestions in regard to this matter will be appreciated.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Franklin Ransom
> Sent from my iPhone
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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] Question about Boole’s An Investigation of the Laws of Thought

[pragmaticist . logos]


Hello list,

It has been some years since I lasted posted, and I have only been lurking ever 
since.

I am hoping to get some advice on reading George Boole’s An Investigation of 
the Laws of Thought. This is a text which CS Peirce references in his earlier 
logical work, and I was hoping to follow along Peirce’s early work by 
understanding what he used as a basis for developing his own ideas.

I’ve had some difficulty though in trying to decipher Boole’s work. His earlier 
essay on his work I was able to get through, but the book proves more 
challenging. At first I tried an online PDF, but what I found had noticeable 
typos, the sort of thing one really wants to avoid in a work using a lot of 
abstract symbols.

So some years ago I acquired a hard copy of the currently printed version from 
Watchmaker Publishing, but found the book still having typos. This is rather 
frustrating, as they’ve had over a century and a half to get it right. I 
suspect it has to do with digitization of the book and then publishing the 
latest hard copy based on this poor digitization. After trying for a couple 
years to get through it, I decided I couldn’t figure out if it was due to typos 
that I don’t know are typos, or simply inability to comprehend on my part, that 
has kept me from being able to interpret the work successfully.

So what I’d like to know is if there are possibly any publications on Boole’s 
work, hopefully in relation to Peirce’s early logical work extending the 
Boolean calculus, that might assist me in finally getting through Boole’s book. 
Any advice or suggestions in regard to this matter will be appreciated.

Sincerely,
Franklin Ransom
Sent from my iPhone_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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.