Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

    Supp-supplement: And, I think, that amongst the things about what is to be said more, is the subject of the difference between classification and composition (inclusion), which Russell had pointed out. The third one, between them (as there are always three- Peircean) is power. 1: Composition,

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

    Supplement: From Wikipedia and other internet articles I have got the strong idea, that Russell (of whom there was only one, he just had got very old) was a good guy. Might have called himself "atheist", but performatively always worked for the general good. So I wonder. Don´t bother to tell

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

Thank you, John, Stephen, and all, especially John, for your patient explanations and answers to my errors. From all I know, which is not much, I of course agree so far. Also, that someone has to clear the brushes. Have there been two Russells? I have read an article about Russell falsely claiming

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

Wittgenstein, Peirce, and Nietzsche fit together and seeing that seems to me almost key to figuring out where we need to go. Of the three Peirce is the heavy lifter, Nietzsche the brush clearer and Wittgenstein the assent CSP needs to say what he does about science, metaphysics, and semiotics.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

John, Well put, indeed! Kirsti M. John F Sowa kirjoitti 3.6.2018 00:57: On 6/2/2018 5:33 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote: I vaguely recall that [Wittgenstein] said like: "About (this or that) you must not speak"... I just remember that when I read it, I thought: "No, you don´t tell me when to shut

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

On 6/6/2018 1:06 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote: The inferences of “synthesis" for CSP philosophy appears to broader and deeper than metaphysics. Peirce had a broad understanding of many fields, and he frequently used insights from one to form abductions (by analogies and metaphors) that enriched

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

On 6/5/2018 7:46 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote: In the case of the ancient term, synthesis, it is commonly used in CSP’s profession to mean the putting together of atoms to form molecules. The word 'synthesis' means "putting together". A thesis and an antithesis are both propositions. Both of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

John, List: > On Jun 5, 2018, at 5:05 PM, John F Sowa wrote: > > Thanks. But I thought of another answer to the question about > thesis/antithesis/synthesis: > > The synthesis is always metaphysical -- transcendental, as Kant > called it, or a kind of Thirdness, as Peirce would say. > > B I

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

On 6/2/2018 11:45 PM, Gary Richmond wrote: The [dualities] that are complementary, not contradictory, can be the basis for a synthesis.  That's true of many of them.  But there is no synthesis of open-mind vs closed-mind. A commonality that characterizes Frege, Russell, Carnap, Quine, and the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

John, list, Another invaluable post. Your being both a logician and philosopher of the history of logic and certain facets of scientific philosophy (especially 19th and 20th century logic/philosophy), and being an avowed Peircean pragmatist puts you in a unique position, in my view, for

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

Helmut and Stephen, To interpret Wittgenstein (or any philosopher), it's essential to consider all the issues and put them in context. As I said in my previous comment, Russell and Carnap misunderstood the Tractatus. They assumed that LW agreed with them that metaphysics, especially theology,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

John, Helmut, John Sowa wrote: The [dualities] that are complementary, not contradictory, can be the basis for a synthesis. That's true of many of them. But there is no synthesis of open-mind vs closed-mind. A commonality that characterizes Frege, Russell, Carnap, Quine, and the movements of

Re: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

I think Peirce has the answer in triadic thinking as opposed to the yes and no that is the cultural expression of binary thinking. The maxim suggests that ethics and esthetics have a role t play in conscious thought. THat has immense implications. amazon.com/author/stephenrose On Sat, Jun 2,

Aw: Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

Stephen, John, list, yes, thank you. I always wonder about this gap. In physics there is experimental physics and theoretical physics, but do they quarrel or disagree? No. They are trying to get along, and do (Higgs boson, dark matter...). But the philosophers, they still are split up, either

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

On 6/2/2018 5:33 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote: I vaguely recall that [Wittgenstein] said like: "About (this or that) you must not speak"... I just remember that when I read it, I thought: "No, you don´t tell me when to shut up". That was from the his first book, the Tractatus. He wrote that while

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

Wittgenstein was making a point about "metaphysical" language for which there was no scientific proof. It is the conclusion of his Tractatus. I think he was suggesting such language is inevitably incapable of grasping what remains a mystery. He knew of course that most speech is not responsive to

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

    Supp: He said: "Was sich überhaupt sagen läßt, läßt sich klar sagen; und wovon man nicht reden kann, darüber muß man schweigen.“ "What can be said at all, can be said clearly, and what cannot be talked about, must be silent about". Assuming, that a good philosopher usually does not utter

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

John, list, maybe they just have been angry when saying so? Didn´t Wittgenstein too say something inquiry-blocking like that once? I vaguely recall that he said something like: "About (this or that) you must not speak". I don´t remember, was it about what you cannot define, what you cannot

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

On 6/2/2018 3:45 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote: some of these dualities (e.g.: Nominalism/universalism, semantics/semiotics, linguistic turn/cognitive turn, empiricism/metaphysics) are not necessarily antinomies, but may be regarded for theses/antitheses, that may merge to syntheses,

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

    Supplement: Maybe too, I suffer from disharmonyphopia, or am harmony-addicted, so always look for compatibility instead of contradiction. And I like Noam Chomsky. John, list, In the list I often sense, not only in your posts, a strong antipathy against certain philosophers and their

Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

John, list, In the list I often sense, not only in your posts, a strong antipathy against certain philosophers and their theories. On one hand I understand that, because I have felt something like that too, against Skinner and his behaviourism. Not to speak of Nietzsche, his resentful

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

Mary, My previous post was intended for John alone. Please ignore it. I apologize for my mistake. Please don't apologize. I'm glad to get the free advertising. reading Joyce’s ouevre, reading Peirce (whom I think Joyce read in 1903-4 when he reviewed FCS Schiller’s book on pragmatism in a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

Jerry, I've been tied up with some critical deadlines, which require me to curtail my email activities. I'll reply to your comments next week. But I just wanted to mention an article in which I discuss issues related to the following exchange: Wittgenstein's language games represent the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

List, John: > On May 24, 2018, at 8:01 AM, John F Sowa wrote: > >> JLRC Wrote: >> he foresaw the grammatical constraints in his (1860’s) >> specification of the breadth and depth of information. > JFS responded: > Without seeing a quotation, I don't know exactly what you're

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

List, John: (N.B. This post includes substantial technical material. I conjecture that it is readable for a substantial subset of the readers of this list serve. No apologies, just my views expressed within the lexical field of the natural sciences.) Before responding to your insightful

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

List, John: My thoughts were on a different pattern of syzygy. Comments after your post and after your slide. You will note that I am being very very picky in these comments. This is because CSP logic, which he repeatedly said was based on chemistry failed and the reasons why it failed to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

On 5/22/2018 1:22 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote: Of particular interest is Venn’s views on the role of “=“ sign. Copula? Or predicate? Or, in view of symbolization of the modern logic of set theory, should the “=“ sign be banned altogether? Wittgenstein's answer in the Tractatus is simple:

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Empirical or inductive logic Open-ended logics?

List, John Thanks for these IMPORTANT historical references! > On May 19, 2018, at 10:44 AM, John F Sowa wrote: > > That led me to Venn's articles from 1880, which may have had a > significant influence on Peirce's thinking about graph logics. > They're in the 1880