Re: [PEIRCE-L] Relations & Their Relatives

Cf: Relations & Their Relatives • Review 1 https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2021/08/15/relations-their-relatives-review-1relations-their-relatives-4/ All, Peirce’s notation for elementary relatives was illustrated earlier by a dyadic relation from number theory, namely i|j for i being a divisor

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

List: If I just take this exchange as an example of what I see as a problem with the focus of this List: BM: But I am wholly astonished by the rigorus property you are attaching to definitions or descriptions made by Peirce. He was not God the Father. Surely we have to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

List: > On Aug 15, 2021, at 10:06 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Now - what is the point of the first view, other than a taxonomic focus on > terms - and what is the point of the second view - which to me at least, > seems to be to examine that 'general rule' as it articulates itself within

RE: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

Bernard, I wish I could converse about this aspect of language in French, but unfortunately I don’t have that ability. BM: But I am wholly astonished by the rigorus property you are attaching to definitions or descriptions made by Peirce. He was not God the Father. Surely we have to refer to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }Robert, list And here is the scientific method as outlined by Robert - and, in my view, Peirce. It seems different from that outlined by De Tienne. And I have several questions about these differences.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

Robert, List: I think that we might have finally landed on some common ground here, as I have no major objections to what is described below as "the *chronological order* of discovery," especially since the poset (3→2→1) is rightly described as "a *candidate *to be the 'skeleton-set' of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

Robert, List, I strongly agree with your approach, and I would like to add three quotations by Peirce (copied below).  They show that De Tienne has misunderstood the role of mathematics in Peirce's philosophy. But I am not claiming that ADT does not understand Peirce, People were doing

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

Edwina, List: ET: And notice the difference between this and the outline by De Tienne, where we are told that 'pure mathematics plays freely with forms, unconcerned with whether they play any part in experience' but then, he also says that 'phaneroscopy may help mathematicians through corrective

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }JAS, list I think Robert has to provide his purpose for us - because my interpretation of Robert's outline is different from your interpretation. I read Robert's outline - not as referring to 'applied

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

List, Helmut: Helmut: Are we addressing different levels of abstract? I do not find any connection between your response and my post. Can you rephrase you comments so that the connection is clarified? Cheers Jerry > On Aug 13, 2021, at 3:46 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote: > > Jerry, List >

Aw: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

Supplement: Now I have looked at Wikipedia "Reality", and seen, that my distinction of real versus existing is not commonly agreed, in fact is problematic, so I think it might be not helpful starting a detour about that, so I propose just going on about John´s post.   Jerry, List   I was

Aw: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

Jerry, List   I was talking about the sentence "All hypotheses are mathematically generated", and then suggested, which definition of mathematics applies to this statement. Fortunately John just posted something, he can explain better than me. In this following quote of his, "(a)" is what I

[PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

List, My initial comment was to salute Jon Alan's message (Peirce-l - Re: [PEIRCE-L] AndrÃ(c) De Tienne: Slow Read slide 23 - arc (iupui.edu) , with a single quote from Peirce that I thought particularly adapted to introduce the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations

Dear John, I think that the text "*Modeling in Humanities: the case of Peirce's Semiotics (Part A*)" that I just published answers your question. I maintain that retaining a definition of the sign that does not incorporate the internal determinations of the sign by the object and the interpreter

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations

Jon, excuse me for "John" ... Honorary Professor ; PhD Mathematics ; PhD Philosophy fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Marty *https://martyrobert.academia.edu/ * Le dim. 15 août 2021 à 12:18, robert marty a écrit : > Dear John, > > I think that the text