Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs and the principle of individuation

On 4/10/2017 11:46 AM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote: The unique role of the chemical elements in the composition of chemical sentences serve as an excellent model for the logical structures of other sentences in other symbol systems. I agree that the system of chemical elements is more tractable

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs

> On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:44 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > How exactly would you pose "the Kantian question about 'Das Ding an sich'? > What makes you think that I am "trying to get a short way out of" it? I take it primarily as the problem of reference. While

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs

Kirsti, List: I am indeed exploring the hypothesis that all Signs can be classified, but not necessarily assuming that this is always easy to do. On the contrary, I recognize the difficulty in many cases, including this one in particular--which is why I sought input from the List. "Our existing

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Sign as Triad vs. Correlate of Triadic Relation (Was semantic problem with the term)

> On Apr 8, 2017, at 10:46 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > Indeed, Peirce defined "potential" as "indeterminate yet capable of > determination in any special case" (CP 6.185; 1898), but wrote that "Ideas, > or Possibles"--i.e., the constituents of the Universe of

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs and the principle of individuation

Jerry, List, did I get it right, that "individuation" is just a thought-experiment about what and how a thing (or law...) would be, if it was totally rid of any representation? just, what a "thing in itself" would be: Something incomprehensible for the scholastic doctors, as Gary wrote? Not only

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs

> On Apr 9, 2017, at 7:41 PM, John F Sowa wrote: > > The surface is a vague boundary. All plants and animals have > exterior cells that are dead or dying (hair, skin, scales, bark) > and they have secretions (sweat, tears, oils, sap, resins). > > The outer layers are always

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs and the principle of individuation

List: The following quote deserves rigorous study. It is deeply relevant to three critical aspects of CSP’s philosophy of science: 1. issues that relate realism to idealism 2. issues that relate the physical sciences to the chemical sciences and 3. issues that relate the sciences to the

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs

BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; } John, a very nice post - but I do have some quibbles. I don't think that you can reduce the differentiation and subsequent networking of these differences that is the basis of complexity- to vagueness. That is,

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Laws of Nature as Signs

Kirsti, Thanks for the notice. Of course that setup is barely a beginning. It is only the grounds out of which understanding must grow, IF our understanding is to proceed on these two conditions: MAT. We take the methods and tools that C.S. Peirce gave us seriously. COR. We take the context

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Laws of Nature as Signs

Jon A. Seems valid to me. But it does not answer the quest for understanding. - If you see my point. Kirsti Jon Awbrey kirjoitti 7.4.2017 02:02: Jon, List ... I've mentioned the following possibility several times before, but maybe not too recently. A sign relation L is a subset of a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs

John, I found it very interesting that you took up metaphor in connection with "laws of nature". I once got across with a study on metaphors in science with a side note by the researchers that natural scientist often got angry on any hint that they may have been using such. - It was just

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Laws of Nature as Signs

Jon, The presupposition in your question(s)you do not take up is the presupposition that all signs can and may be (easily) classified. - If you look up some detailed versions of Peirces classifications of signs, and you'll see what kinds of problems I mean. "Our existing universe" does not

[PEIRCE-L] Jaakko Hintikka - Memorial Issue - Logica Universalis

Jaakko Hintikka Memorial Special Issue of Logica Universalis Edited by Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen Call for Papers Any paper related to the work of Hintikka is welcome, in particular those dealing with the following topics: - Knowledge and Belief - Independence-friendly logic - Lingua Universalis vs