[peirce-l] Re: Trikonic diagram observation of Peirce's 10 Sign Classes

[merkle]

Dear Gary,

You are completly right when you say that each diagram stresses some
dimensions of semiotic processes.

Indeed, today I would complement that the Icon, Index and Symbol, can be
both a classificatory scheme (tree classes) or a dimension in a broader
set of classes (10 or more classes). The different but related meanings
need a historical understanding of the development of them across Peirce's
life to be further studied. At the time I wrote my thesis I did not had a
fully appreciation of the implications of this difference.

Luiz,

ps: (I was away for the most part of the last two weeks.)




 Diagrammatic observation can be a valuable adjunct to philosophical
 analysis. It seems to me that even this relatively simple trikonic
 analysis of Peirce's diagram of the Classification of Signs can offer
 some insight into the deep categorial structure of his semeiotic. I
 would hope that all valid diagrams (Merkle's, Marty's, Udell's and my
 own, for example) would be considered. Peirce suggested once that a
 categorial analysis could never be 'wrong' because it only tried to
 offer hints and suggestions which might prove valuable. And this is all
 I'm offering in the present analysis--what I hope may be helpful hints
  suggestions.





---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com

[peirce-l] Re: Sinsign, Legisign, Qualisign

[merkle]

List, Bernard, Robert, Joe, Ben, Gary, Claudio, Arnaud,

For a long time I do not post on this list. I wish I had more time, so
interesting and dear to me is this topic. It's nice to see how this topic
is a recurrent theme in the important discussions that take place here,
and how new visualizations of Peirces classes appeared.

Well, some time ago I attempted to visualise Peirce's Classes and their
relations through a formalism known as a Hasse Diagram, which I extended
to three dimensions. It was a final chapter of a Computer Science Ph.D.
Thesis.

My aim was to show that some formalisms used in mathematics could
contribute to mediate some discussions I've found in the literature about
classes of signs.

Indeed, my objective was not to discuss the meaning of the classes, or the
corresponding order (or partial order) of the sign relation (triadic,
hexadic, decadic), but to show that different partial orders correspond to
different class sets. If a specific order (or partial order) was
correct according to Peirce was way beyond the scope of that work,
although I had my views of it.

The reader will find appendend a diagram of a  3D hasse
diagram of the ten classes. I've tried to include a second diagram of a 6D
Hasse Diagram of two sets of 28 classes (page 299 at
http://www.dainf.cefetpr.br/~merkle/thesis/CH4.pdf), derived from two
distinct hexadic sign relations. The 729 possibilities appear on the
background.

Unfortunately it was too large to send to the list. There are some classes
in common in sets associated with distinct sign relations. Although I have
problems with the hexadic notion of sign, because I think that they lack
the relations between SOI, I never did a 10D Hasse diagram of the 66
classes, showing at least all 59059 possibilities.

A word of caution. At the time when I wrote it I used the term
categories instead of classes, which may cause confusion for those
acquainted with Peirce's work. My apologies. However, I always used
Cenopythagorean Categories to stand for Firstness, Secondness and
Thirdness. Once I have time to review that text, replacing single
occurrences of categories to classes, I will post again the link to it
at Arisbe. For the moment, I post it on this list, which may contribute to
the currend discussion.

The whole chapter, which include several other visualizations of the
classes, and some footnotes indicating my favorite interpretations, is
available at:
http://www.dainf.cefetpr.br/~merkle/thesis/CH4.pdf

[]s,
Luiz Merkle






---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com