Jon, List,
I think, the dimensionality of a line or of a surface is only then integer (1 or 2), if the line is straight, or the surface is even. Otherwise, the dimensionality of the line is between 1 and 2, or of the surface it is between 2 and 3.
Best, Helmut
09. Oktober 2021 um 23:
Cf: C.S. Peirce • Algebra of Logic ∫ Philosophy of Notation • 2
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2021/10/10/c-s-peirce-algebra-of-logic-%e2%88%ab-philosophy-of-notation-2/
All,
Continuing the previous passage in preparation for discussing the
iconic, indexical, and symbolic aspects of Peirce's logi
From: "Jon Alan Schmidt"
Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 5:09 PM
To: "Peirce-L"
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] [EXTERNAL] Peirce on Dimensionality (was
ConnectedSigns Theorem)
Jack, List:
I can offer a couple more thoughts related to dimensi
I accidentally hit SEND on my previous reply.
I won't criticize anybody's attempts to determine exactly what Peirce
intended a century ago/ But a far more important issue is what his ideas
mean for us today. A few years ago, I wrote a widely cited n article with
the title "Peirce's contri
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}List
I obviously completely agree. A vital issue in Peircean studies is-
what do his ideas mean for us today? Quite frankly, to confine
Peircean studies to textual analysis, terms, etc has its uses, but,
it relega
Helmut, List:
>From a topological standpoint, any line figure is one-dimensional
regardless of whether it is straight or curved, and any surface is
two-dimensional regardless of whether it is flat or undulating. At any
arbitrarily marked point on a line figure, only a hypothetical particle
moving
John, List,
John, do you really believe that most everyone -- or even many a one -- now
working in linguistics, cognitive science, and AI sufficiently, let alone,
thoroughly understands Peirce's contributions to philosophy, semeiotic and
a number of relevant sciences and so they are now fully read
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;
}Gary R, List
I won't speak for John but only myself. I'm a bit confused by your
post.
First - I don't believe that anyone - whether in the 'pure
philosophy' field or the applied fields can ever say: 'OK,
Edwina, John, List
ET: First - I don't believe that anyone - whether in the 'pure philosophy'
field or the applied fields can ever say: 'OK, I now sufficiently and
thoroughly understand Peirce's contributions' . Someone, either oneself or some
one else - will have more to say.
I agree with you th