[PEIRCE-L] Re: The simplest model for the ten classes of signs

of energy-as-matter', then, these bits presumably interact. If > we have only a direct 'hit' between two 'bits-of-matter', then this > mechanical process would enhance entropy. And again - we acknowledge the > reality of Thirdness - which mediates such interactions a

[PEIRCE-L] The simplest model for the ten classes of signs

in order to allow critical access to this natural extension of Peirce's semiotics from the state in which he left it to us. https://www.academia.edu/44347570/The_simplest_model_for_the_ten_classes_of_signs Thank you for your comments and criticism, Robert Marty Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathem

[PEIRCE-L] The lattice of five paths (2)

Please excuse this omission ... https://www.academia.edu/44146664/The_lattice_of_five_paths Robert Marty Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fran%C3%A7ois_Raymond_Marty <https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fran

[PEIRCE-L] The lattice of five paths

ee the exemple of nicotine : https://www.academia.edu/42930701/Nicotine_a_semiotic_confrontation_between_life_and_death Best regards, Robert Marty Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fran%C3%A7ois_Raymond_Marty <https:/

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce's methodology

e. > > > > Gary f. > > > > *From:* robert marty > *Sent:* 6-Aug-20 18:39 > *To:* Gary Fuhrman ; Peirce-L > > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce's methodology > > > > Gary, I admit that I saw in your post an attempt to lower the role of > mathemat

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce's methodology

sts caught your attention ... so I won't do it again and I'll stop spreading terror with a humorous signature that you took perhaps a bit too seriously. There won't be blood on the walls! Best regards, Robert Marty Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy fr.wikipedia.org

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce's methodology

t also be significant." These relations can of course be read in Peirce as above but also and at a glance in the lattice of the 10 classes of signs (a mathematical object that encapsulates the 10 classes). Best regards, Robert Marty Semiotics is a fighting sport Honorary Professo

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce's methodology

onding dicent and rhematic indexical sinsigns and furthermore that the legisigns themselves are encapsulated in dicent and rhematic symbols which combined using deductive or inductive arguments produce theories. But as they say in French "il n'est pire sourd qui ne veut entendre"! (h

[PEIRCE-L] The "affinities" according to CS Peirce: the possibility of a lattice.

List, I submit to you new argumented clarifications on the concordance between the affinities between classes of signs diagrammatized by CS Peirce and the lattice of the classes of signs. I hope you find them convincing.Here is the abstract of this 10-page text: https://www.academia.edu/43672037

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Logic of Interpretation

nd...@icloud.com> a écrit : > Robert: > > On Jul 16, 2020, at 6:56 AM, robert marty > wrote: > > Your "demonstration" on the chemical combinations between atoms shows > above all your ignorance of mathematical modelling in chemistry. > > > Again, you give me a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Logic of Interpretation

Dear Jerry : Google is your friend : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finitary_relation Please note that Peirce's name appears on this page. Your "demonstration" on the chemical combinations between atoms shows above all your ignorance of mathematical modelling in chemistry. The terms "logic of relat

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: The Logic of Interpretation

eirce-l/2020-05/msg00122.html> a > couple of months ago, "Surely propositions in a thread starter act as > invitation, implicitly." I am interested in discussing the logic of > interpretation in general, not claiming that there is only one such logic. > > Regards, &g

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: The Logic of Interpretation

city is risky." > > > Cheers > > Jerry > > On Jul 15, 2020, at 1:15 PM, robert marty > wrote: > > Jerry, > Glad you liked it! I am determined not to polemicize and not to confuse > science with erudition ... > Cheers, > Robert Marty > > Le mer.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: The Logic of Interpretation

Jerry, Glad you liked it! I am determined not to polemicize and not to confuse science with erudition ... Cheers, Robert Marty Le mer. 15 juil. 2020 à 19:58, Jerry LR Chandler < jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> a écrit : > Robert: > > On Jul 15, 2020, at 9:04 AM, robert marty >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: The Logic of Interpretation

Jon Alan, List Why do you call your thread "*The* Logic of interpretation" (the bold is mine) when all your text says is *"**Your*" logic of interpretation and ends with a self-assessment that "this kind of insight is "extremely fallible" and must be put to the test"? Your next text corrects sligh

Re: [PEIRCE-L] diagrams of semiosis

. Best regards Robert Le mer. 1 juil. 2020 à 09:53, robert marty a écrit : > REP EN > 01/07 > > > > · No it's not entirely clear: Do I understand that you keep your > diagram simply by removing the ovals? If so it's up to you to do it... for > I r

Re: [PEIRCE-L] diagrams of semiosis

uch an interpretant is not *actual* (dynamical), but rather *possible > *(immediate) > or even conditionally *necessary *(final)--"If a sign has no interpreter, > its interpretant is a 'would be,' i.e., is what it *would* determine in > the interpreter if there were one"

Re: [PEIRCE-L] diagrams of semiosis

istinctions. I again wish to acknowledge > Menno Hulswit for proposing such an approach, although he substitutes > "necessary condition" for "formal cause" in the first bullet. On the other > hand, the last three bullets reflect my own current understanding of the > process

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] diagrams of semiosis

my website semiotiquedure.online you will also find a manual entitled "The intelligence of the signs" with a lesson instituted "The social inscription of the sign" (in French http://semiotiquedure.online/MANUEL/lesson9.htm ) Best, Robert Marty Le mar. 23 juin 2020 à 19:41, Edwi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] diagrams of semiosis

Helmut, Gary F., List It seems to me essential to highlight, in any diagrammatic presentation of the sign, the internal determinations of the sign by the object and of the interpretant by the sign. Peirce does so from 1905 (see the appendix of https://arisbe.sitehost.iu.edu/rsources/76DEFS/76defs.H

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

Jon Alan, List We are at this point at the heart of our differences. That a sign cannot have a transmitter or interpreter is of great banality. Just consider the tides, the many pareidolia [1] <#_ftn1> for the former and for the latter think about the possible effects of global warming that no on

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Communicating an Idea (was commens and commons)

terminologies, conceptual frameworks, and analyses of the > universe deviate from his. > > Thanks, > > Jon S. > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 3:11 AM robert marty > wrote: > >> Jon, List >> >> Jon I suppose that in this search for coherence in "certain asp

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

Dear Jon Alan, JAS > "Something need not be perceived in order to qualify as a sign, as long as it is *capable *of determining a dynamical interpretant by virtue of having an immediate interpretant ... and a final interpretant ..." RM > If I were a literalist, I would say this: "But agai

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Communicating an Idea (was commens and commons)

Jon, List Jon I suppose that in this search for coherence in "certain aspects of Peirce's thought" you do not rule out using mathematical objects which are appeared in ulterior development of this discipline that was not at his disposal more than 100 years ago? Otherwise, wouldn't the pure appro

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Communicating an Idea (was commens and commons)

> to one another ... The vagueness of every idea deprives it of absolute > identity even with itself" (R 787:21[25]). It is an idea in *this *sense > that according to Peirce can only be communicated "by means of an icon"; > namely, "the *predicate *of the assertio

Re: [PEIRCE-L] commens and commons

I agree with you. The stakes seem minor to me; In fact, I subtitled my book "L'Algébre des Signes" with "Scientific Essay according to Charles Sanders Peirce" and I made it clear in my introduction that given the state in which Peirce's work is presented ("The Peircian Continent" very well describe

Re: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

istinction from a symbolic sign is not according to the nature of the sign > itself, but rather its dyadic relation with its dynamical object, which is > that of *efficient *causation. A properly functioning weathercock points > in a certain direction because the wind is *actually *blowing

Re: Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Way of Thinking (was Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis)

Helmut, List If I can tell Helmut there are no two concepts. A sign is always a real thing that represents because to be sign it must be perceived ... Why wouldn't a sign as a representation" be a real thing? Let's look at the statue that is at the entrance to New York Harbor ... Isn't that an exi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis (was Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion)

e ... It consists of all that is, and must > be, well understood between utterer and interpreter, at the outset, in > order that *the sign in question* should fulfill its function" (EP 2:478, > 1906, bold added). In other words, the commens is clearly not "universal" > and &quo

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis (was Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion)

ng clear. We may adopt the word to mean the very > fact, that is, *the ideal sign* which should be quite perfect, and so > identical,--in such identity as a sign may have,--with the very matter > denoted united with the very form signified by it. The entelechy of the > Universe of being, t

[PEIRCE-L] Lattices of the classes of signs without category theory

, without mobilizing any concept of the category theory. https://www.academia.edu/43232359/Lattices_without_category_theory Thanks for your comments, Robert Marty _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this mes

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis (was Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion)

colas Boileau (1636 - 1711): Le jeu. 28 mai 2020 à 17:26, robert marty a écrit : > Jon Alan, List > > Thank you again for explaining your designs on how the hexadic sign works > and for summarising them at the end of your post. This has allowed me to > limit myself to reviewing you

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Theory and Analysis of Semeiosis (was Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion)

sitehost.iu.edu/menu/library/aboutcsp/richmond/trikonic.htm> > of > *analysis *(3ns→2ns→1ns), along with the logical relation of involution > or presupposition. Accordingly, although the order of the three *genuine > *correlates is the same as above (O→S→I)--conforming to Gary's

[PEIRCE-L] The podium "enriched" of the universal categories of Peirce.

This is an "enriched" version of the podium that complete the one that appears in the draft of my article awaiting publication: The podium of the universal categories of C.S.Peirce https://www.academia.edu/

[PEIRCE-L] The Five Paths of Signs (Note)

Abstract: This text is a methodological complement for a "dynamic" use of the lattice of the ten classes of signs. https://www.academia.edu/43167632/The_Five_Paths_of_Signs_Note_ Thanks for comments, Best regards, Robert _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply

Re: Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion (was To put an end ...)

Part of my post remained in French. I apologize for that. "I consider that the text below is fundamental to justify the use of a new concept that will fulfill this function of "social counter-reaction" of individual semiosis:" Best, RM Le lun. 25 mai 2020 à 12:19, r

Re: Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion (was To put an end ...)

n 2ns, some in a > mixture of 1ns, 2ns, 3ns, and some in 3ns.that the Final Interpretant > in this networked community - would be that generalized law? Then, this > community will presumably change its habits - but - even so, a community > will continue to 'be semiosic'

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion (was To put an end ...)

opened; and the evidence is > too overwhelming. (CP 1.204, 1902) > > > Notice that for Peirce final causes do not entail agency, theistic or > otherwise. He confirms this later in the same manuscript. > > > CSP: It is, as I was saying, a widespread error to think that a &

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion (was To put an end ...)

as, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:58 AM robert marty > wrote: > >> Jon Alan, List >> >> I'd rather we stay on the list. I have cl

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion (was To put an end ...)

"explicit" about the explicit > interpretant as you define it? > > Finally, how do you relate your podium diagram to the destinate, > effective, and explicit interpretants? Which one do you see as the genuine > interpretant (3), which is degenerate (2/3), and which is

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion (was To put an end ...)

han an effect that the sign > *does* have on an individual subject on a particular occasion. The > latter is always a *dynamical *interpretant, and it can be different for > different subjects who have different degrees of sign system acquaintance, > different collateral experience/observation, a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Destinate Interpretant and Predestinate Opinion (was To put an end ...)

on. >- The final (destinate) interpretant is whatever the sign itself > *necessarily >would* signify to someone under ideal circumstances, including the > ultimate opinion after infinite inquiry by an infinite community. > > Is that helpful? > > Regards,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] To put an end to the false debate on the classification of signs

du/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2020-04/msg00173.html>. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 5:02 PM rob

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Semiosis and Truth

Helmut, you are very close to what I say... however, I would like to know where you place this final interpretant in the hexadic sign... Best Robert Le mar. 19 mai 2020 à 17:08, Helmut Raulien a écrit : > Edwina, List, > > I think, that "final" in "final interpretant" is not meant like "in

Re: [PEIRCE-L] To put an end to the false debate on the classification of signs

I am sorry but if you are begining with " If commens means the sum at any time of whatever everybody happens to come up with,..." I am obliged, on Peirce's list to give the floor to peirce on this subject : " There is the Intentional Interpretant, which is a determination of the mind of the utter

Re: [PEIRCE-L] To put an end to the false debate on the classification of signs

t; > Would you likewise say that knowledge is not actual, or real, unless it is > absolute and unquestionable? > > > > Gary f. > > > > *From:* robert marty > *Sent:* 18-May-20 03:25 > *To:* Jon Alan Schmidt > *Cc:* Peirce-L > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] To p

Re: [PEIRCE-L] To put an end to the false debate on the classification of signs

ml>, here > <https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2020-04/msg00024.html>, and > here <https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2020-04/msg00173.html>. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lu

Re: [PEIRCE-L] To put an end to the false debate on the classification of signs

ing the idea that If > functions BEFORE the II and DI - a concept which I reject. I'm not sure if > you share the same opinion on this as JAS - but- I would appreciate > clarification. > > Again - thank you for your posts. > > Edwina > > > > On Sat 16/05/20 12

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Peirce-L Forum principle of a "generosity of attitude."

Gary, John, List John I will be less severe than you and perhaps more pragmatic and "virile"( 😉) considering that this verbiage that does not seem to have the function of "block the way of inquiry" has another - perhaps worse - that is to "drown the way of inquiry" ... in doing so it tests the ro

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Peirce-L Forum principle of a "generosity of attitude."

Gary, list your comments, which I largely approve of, seem a little tinged with relativism (all the theories are equal). but this is probably due to the position of moderator. this is the reason why I think that the "generosity of attitude" should be balanced by the principle of charity (to be han

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories and Speculative Grammar Revisited (was Essay about categories and logical presuppositions)

Jon Allan, List, John Sowa Jon Allan, List, John Sowa I apply the principle of charity mentioned by John Sowa not long ago ... I like it … I also want it applied to me ... JAS > Unfortunately only the "valency" table is correct and rele

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Essay about categories and logical presuppositions

Auke, Bernard, List I do not know if I understood where the reluctance was. It seems to me that I may have to make some clarifications that will lead to avoid the misunderstandings for which I am solely responsible. 1- Category theory lives its life independently of Peirce's semiotics. Howev

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Isn’t there a similarity ?

/5252/1/Peirce%27s_Semeiotic_509338.pdf Best, Robert Le ven. 8 mai 2020 à 20:23, robert marty a écrit : > You're the one who sees... > - PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this messa

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Nicotine, a semiotic confrontation between life and death

with 4 exercises : Build the lattice of the 10 classes of signs in one lesson https://www.academia.edu/42974040/Build_the_lattice_of_the_10_classes_of_signs_in_one_lesson hoping it will be useful to you Best regards, Robert Le dim. 3 mai 2020 à 18:09, robert marty a écrit : > List, John,G

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories and Modes of Being (was Essay about categories and logical presuppositions)

Rectification : Exercises 1 and 2 : Build a functor of (D) in (C).( For reasons of homogeneity of the notations with other papers.) Le jeu. 7 mai 2020 à 12:05, Robert Marty a écrit : > Jon Alan, Helmut, Edwina, List > > JAS > "Unfortunately I am not adept enough with math

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories and Modes of Being (was Essay about categories and logical presuppositions)

seems to me that this is *more *consistent with "the > immutable suite of the three 3ns→2ns→1ns" as 3→2/3→1/2/3, just as the two > objects are Od→Oi as 2→1/2. Am I overlooking something in the underlying > logic that *requires* the sequence of the interpretants to be Ii→I

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories and Modes of Being (was Essay about categories and logical presuppositions)

gt; that contradict the original one. . And - how quite a few of these results > are unscientific and yet, will be firmly held beliefs. > > The scenario would be best viewed as an animated cartoon [ in vivid colour > of course] - to explain these flexible and dynamic transformations! >

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Essay about categories and logical presuppositions

;3 involves 1". That may be true for some concepts > of involution or presupposition but I think the operative relation in this > case is a thoroughly irreducible triadic relation, one whose properties do > not reduce to the composition of two dyadic relations. > > Regards, >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories and Modes of Being (was Essay about categories and logical presuppositions)

quot; in the category of relational structures. But that's another story... For now I am sorry to find that I submitted my nicotine analysis to the criticism on May 3rd and that I did not get any reaction. I believe that I show and demonstrate how a positive image of semiotics is formed

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories and Modes of Being (was Essay about categories and logical presuppositions)

Gary, Jon Alan, List I fully respect yours concerns and of course it is clear that everyone can invest them in the podium that is quite honored. For the part concerning me I see no difficulty in using "involution" rather than "presupposition" and I do not think I have strayed too far from Peirce w

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Essay about categories and logical presuppositions

Jon, List, Just for your information , my first articles on the subject: - Marty, Robert, « Catégories et foncteurs en sémiotique », *Semiosis*, n o 6,‎ 1977, p. 5-15 (ISSN 0170-219X

[PEIRCE-L] Nicotine, a semiotic confrontation between life and death

t is proposed in the following analysis. It follows Peirce's recommendations but is fallible and asks to be criticized." Be waiting and best regards, Robert Marty - PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEI

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Essay about categories and logical presuppositions

; > Regards, > > Jon > > On 5/1/2020 1:35 PM, robert marty wrote: > > Thank you Jon, you're a providence. The flow is fed by so many different > > sources that it becomes almost impossible to navigate. When we create a > > thread it happens that very quickly cu

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Essay about categories and logical presuppositions

Thank you Jon, you're a providence. The flow is fed by so many different sources that it becomes almost impossible to navigate. When we create a thread it happens that very quickly cuckoos come to lay their eggs so big that they bring down your children chicks from the nest ... I understood that in

Re: [PEIRCE-L] tree-structure

dy of phenomena with the purpose of identifying their forms with those *mathematics* has studied*," >From then on you can have an instrument of knowledge to study the practices of communication and meaning: *"Pragmatics, the study of how we ought to behave in the light of the truths of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] tree-structure

Thank you John for this information. I believe that a reassessment of the importance of mathematics in Peirce's work must be obtained from the community of Peirceans. As for Hegel's mathematical competence, Peirce was not very charitable : "He has usually overlooked external Secondness, altogether

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: tree-structure

organized in the lattices bring us light? And finally: *CSP > " The result of this rule will necessarily be that the new concept of a "sign" will be defined exclusively by the forms of its logical relationships; and the utmost pains must be taken to understant those relations in a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] tree-structure

Jon, List I always thought that the most peircean of the classifications of sciences was this one : *Mathematics* the study of ideal constructions without reference to their real existence, -Empirics, the study of phenomena with the purpose of identifying their forms with those *mathematics* has

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: tree-structure

Helmut, List I spent a lot of time addressing you an argumentative answer (because I only do answers of this type, and I almost never start a post with "In my opinion ..." or "I think that ..." Etc... unless I am asked, which I must admit is quite rare). I have shown using the basic concepts of ca

Re: Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: tree-structure

d in the ten classes, the >>> triadic 'nodes' can be in any of the modal categories. How about a Sign in >>> 1-1-1, a rhematic iconic qualisgin, where all three nodes are in a mode of >>> 1ns? >>> >>> Edwina >>> >>> >>&

Re: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: tree-structure

don't worry ... I need a little time to give you the clearest possible answer (which assumes I have an answer) ... Regards, Robert Marty Le sam. 25 avr. 2020 à 20:42, Edwina Taborsky a écrit : > Helmut, you wrote: > > (is it agreed now, that sign is 1ns, object 2ns, and interpreta

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: tree-structure

terminology and seeking to apply his ideas > today. Otherwise, we do not actually "build on and extend his work," but > rather create something new of our own invention and wrongly attribute it > to him. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA &g

[PEIRCE-L] tree-structure

"The designations here are the same as above, although the reference is to a longer entry in the Logic Notebook written a few days later. As Bellucci summarizes, "the ten trichotomies are arranged in a *tree-structure*, not as a *linear succession,*" but "Peirce never managed to apply to his tenfo

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categories at work within the signs

Dear colleagues, I have had hundreds of discussions with my students and colleagues, I have conducted master's thesis in several fields and Phd like any academic. Obviously most of them have exploited in their classifications the texts CP 2.254 to 2,265 formalized by me in the lattice of the classe

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Affinities between classes of signs according to CSP vs Marty's Lattice (proof by video 26 sec)

The reverse showing that we actually have isomorphic structures ... https://youtu.be/hc1b_KJEN8o Le dim. 19 avr. 2020 à 11:13, robert marty a écrit : > New more demonstrative video ; the same but with four limited downtime > ... > > https://www.youtube.com/tL29hqNf

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Affinities between classes of signs according to CSP vs Marty's Lattice (proof by video 26 sec)

New more demonstrative video ; the same but with four limited downtime ... https://www.youtube.com/tL29hqNfFlg <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL29hqNfFlg> Regards Le sam. 18 avr. 2020 à 22:10, robert marty a écrit : > I have always maintained that the lattice of the 10 classes

[PEIRCE-L] Affinities between classes of signs according to CSP vs Marty's Lattice (proof by video 26 sec)

I have always maintained that the lattice of the 10 classes of signs is the algebraic realization of the affinities between classes of signs as Peirce describes them from CP 2.254 to CP 2.264. In "The trichotomic machine" ("The trichotomic machine," Semiotica, vol. 2019, No. 228, May 2019, p. 173

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Essay about categories and logical presuppositions

hrd4.html#05337 > 1. > http://web.archive.org/web/20070302154925/http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/msg05337.html > 8. > http://web.archive.org/web/20070302155036/http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/msg05344.html > > The Pragmatic Cosmos (Mar 2012) > https://www.mail-archive.com/peirce-l@listse

[PEIRCE-L] Re: The trichotomic machine brings order among the interpretants

I would like to see how we could combine structures comprising nodes with the 3 modes of being. I will be very sorry that we perceive the slightest arrogance in this statement dictated only by the strength of my convictions. ... As Peirce says, everyone to works out their proper salvation ! Le ma

[PEIRCE-L] The trichotomic machine brings order among the interpretants

Please excuse me. The link I indicated in my answer to Jon was not the right one. Here is the correct link : https://www.academia.edu/40493861/The_trichotomic_machine_brings_order_among_the_interpretants - PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to

[PEIRCE-L] Categories at work within the signs

collective agreement on choices of determinations. Best regards Robert Marty https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty *"… in scientific inquiry, as in other enterprises, the maxim holds : nothing hazard, nothing gain." *(C. S. Peirce, MS 318, Pragmatism) -

[PEIRCE-L] Essay about categories and logical presuppositions

uot; I would be very happy to read your comments. Best regards Robert Marty - 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 . T

<    1   2