er than above, this step is missing. Physical existence is not needed in a negation.
Step 3: This is missing too. Without physical existence no consequence.
Best, Helmut
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 04. Februar 2021 um 10:42 Uhr
Von: "Helmut Raulien"
An: tabor...@primus.ca
Cc: tabor.
ly one tiger. So, it is in 2ns. To write the universal correctly, it would be: NO Tasmanian tigers exist - and that's a universal, a 3ns.
I'm not sure of the point of your double negation.
Edwina
On Wed 03/02/21 6:21 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, List,
Ok, "A exi
namic Object. Its data as received [by my semiosic process] is the Immediate Object. My capacity for receiving the input data may be limited, so my Immediate Object data is quite specific to my capabilities to understand it.
Edwina
On Tue 02/02/21 11:18 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de
define a universal, such as 'goodness' or 'beauty' as 'real', whereas a particular object, even if conceptual such as a unicorn or Zeus, would, in my view, be defined as 'existent'.
Edwina
On Mon 01/02/21 1:15 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Supplement: With "law&q
of religions].
4] I would also say that Unicorns DO 'exist'. They are mental constructs and we see their images in paintings and artwork all over the world. I don't think we can confine 'existence' to physical/biological forms; I think we have to include conceptual forms as well. After all don't sym
structs and we see their images in paintings and artwork all over the world. I don't think we can confine 'existence' to physical/biological forms; I think we have to include conceptual forms as well. After all don't symbols 'exist'?
Edwina
On Mon 01/02/21 11:03 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@g
Auke, Jon, John, Edwina, All,
I don´t see, that a transparent universe is the critical point: Jon A.S.´ example is valid in a transparent universe too: From "There is no unicorn that is not pink" , which is true, does not follow "Every unicorn is pink", which is not true, even or especially
s, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 2:54 PM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Edwina,
yes, "a human is a featherless biped" might be understood as
tion of the attribute [featherless biped] might not always apply to the variable of 'human'.
Edwina
On Fri 29/01/21 11:02 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
All,
I think, the difference is not the meaning, but what it is. Though the double negation´s meaning is the same as the c
John,
yes, but isn´t it so, that in mathematics and symbolic logic, if the extension is known i.e. covered by proofs, an intensional term can be equivalent with an extensional one, and this is called "classical logic"? That is, if I am right, that e.g. "NOT (A AND NOT B)" is extensional, and
Jon, John,
just a thought: Might it be, that in classical mathematics and logic there is not distinguished between intension and extension, and in intuitionistic logic there is? For example, "NOT (A AND NOT B)" is an extensionistic proposition, or the extension of the relation, but "IF A THEN
ry factor or even coincidental.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 12:13 PM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de>
from it. If we could simply agree on that much, I would be glad to stop belaboring the point.
Merry Christmas,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmi
and deriving negation from it. If we could simply agree on that much, I would be glad to stop belaboring the point.
Merry Christmas,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt -
certainly know everything about a simple mechanical system, but, in more complex systems, which is what the world really is - I don't know that knowledge can ever be complete, since the system is, itself, never complete.
Edwina
On Fri 25/12/20 2:15 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
E
is section of the population becomes the dominant and most numerous economic mode - then, democracy becomes the political mode, because it 'privileges' the majority.
Edwina
On Fri 25/12/20 12:41 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Jon,
you wrote "except as...", yes, these e
John, Jon,
Thank you! My first idea is, that to negate each step and reverse the order only is valid with the excluded middle, so exclusion of the middle should be necessary for both ways of proof too. But I will read your links, thank you for your patience! I think, the concept of truth
f it. It might help for you to spell out how you are defining "intuitionistic logic" in this context.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
state of "fuzzy logic" where things have likelihoods — percentages of truth? And then things begin to feel pretty intuitionistic.
SxS
On Dec 23, 2020, at 9:05 AM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organ
tuitionistic.
SxS
On Dec 23, 2020, at 9:05 AM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organization. Do not click links, open attachments, or respond unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the con
Supplement: Interesting is the difference between belief and knowledge: The belief values (affirmation, weak, strong negation) classify three groups: Believers, non-believers, and deniers. Affirmation makes believers a class, weak negation makes non-believers and deniers one class, strong
List,
For me it is not clear, what exactly is claimed to justify intuitionistic logic. Is it the not yet done proof, is it the weak negation, or is it habout handling concepts?
If it is the not yet achieved proof, I think, that is nominalism, isnt it? And it can easily, by induction, be
Supp-supplement: Sorry, in my previous two posts I had gotten confused. I try again (everybody may try three times, isnt it?)
Quotation marks indicate a concept, minusses indicate a quotation. About his own universe, a propositioner cannot justifiedly, nonparadoxically, say:
Supplement: My deduction in the middle of the second paragraph is false. It is only true, if we assume, that a concept is constructed by existence- or by making up: It might be, that in the universe in which no horses exist, people have made up the concept of them nayway, as it might be,
Jon, Gary, List,
I didnt get a feeling so far about intuistic logic, the not excluded middle and the double negation being something else than the non-existent negation. All I can do, is reconstruct these ideas with my own thoughts, otherwise I cannot understand them. I am very interested
has caused.
Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Dezember 2020 um 10:52 Uhr
Von: "Helmut Raulien"
An: baud...@gmail.com
Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Betreff: Aw: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued logic)
Thank you, Ben! This is just a test, to see, whether it is my ema
(test2:) Oh no, deleting both impressum tails leads to no line break! Now I have only deleted the second impressum tail, the one that my post has caused.
Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Dezember 2020 um 10:52 Uhr
Von: "Helmut Raulien"
An: baud...@gmail.com
Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Betre
(test:) Yes, it always adds the impressum tail again. Now I have deleted both impressum tails before sending. Should I always do so?
Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Dezember 2020 um 10:52 Uhr
Von: "Helmut Raulien"
An: baud...@gmail.com
Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Betreff: Aw: Re:
Thank you, Ben! This is just a test, to see, whether it is my email program, that produces the junk-stuff.
Best, Helmut
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. Dezember 2020 um 22:04 Uhr
Von: "Ben Udell"
An: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Betreff: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued
Edwina,
I suggest leaving the question about mutation to the biologists. I mean the vast majority of them, which is not the creationist fraction, and also not the only-lamarckist-anti-darwinist fraction or whoever. Mind appears in the work of bees and crystals, but it is not the single bee´s or
bill to crack seeds is stretching my notion of abduction.
Steven S.
On Dec 16, 2020, at 11:18 AM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of our organization. Do not click links, open attachments, or respond unless you recogni
ike beans I’ve had — and they’re blue. I abduce that they are a new food item grown only locally and I name them “Bleans”, take them back to New York and make a fortune at my restaurant!
I will say that taking the development of a thicker bill to crack seeds is stretching my notion of abduction.
both the inorganic and organic - and most certainly not confined to human beings.
Edwina
On Tue 15/12/20 3:20 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, ok, thoug I would say, the strengthening of the beak might also be seen as a kind of induction, because both the seed shell, and the b
don't see that abduction means an 'awareness of resemblance'.
Edwina
On Mon 14/12/20 2:46 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Supplement: Abduction means, that something is recognized (truly or falsely doesnt matter) as seeming like something other. That is depiction or
ped harder shells by itself developing a harder beak.
I don't see that abduction means an 'awareness of resemblance'.
Edwina
On Mon 14/12/20 2:46 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Supplement: Abduction means, that something is recognized (truly or falsely doesnt matter)
ly as pure observation of 'what is existent'. Nothing to do with any 'need'.
Edwina
On Mon 14/12/20 1:55 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina,
I agree, that in inanimate world there is chance, due to the Heisenberg incertainty and to incertainty as calculated by chaos theory. B
ity. I see induction merely as pure observation of 'what is existent'. Nothing to do with any 'need'.
Edwina
On Mon 14/12/20 1:55 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina,
I agree, that in inanimate world there is chance, due to the Heisenberg incertainty and to incertainty as calculate
these two actions are obviously not found only within the human realm. But also within the 'inanimate' and 'animate'.
I'd say that abduction is the Mind process of Firstness - and found in all forms of existence.
Edwina
On Mon 14/12/20 1:29 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Lis
List,
I have to ponder your posts, because up to now my idea has been, that in inanimate nature merely deduction/efficient causation occurs, in animate nature (organisms) also induction/final causation, and in neuro-nature (brain animals) also abduction/example causation. To suggest that a
ere:
Jakobson, Roman. 1968. Child Language Aphasia and Phonological Universals, Janua Linguarum, Series Minor, 72, Moutoun, The Hague.
And I reframed his explanation in the context of Peirce’s theory of signs in “Wild Language” which can be found here:https://umich.academia.edu/CharlesPyle
be found here: https://umich.academia.edu/CharlesPyle
Charles Pyle
From: Helmut Raulien
Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2020 4:25 PM
To: Charles Pyle
Cc: Peirce-L
Subject: Aw: RE: [PEIRCE-L] multiple-valued logic
Charles,
wow, interesting! I think about it. By first glance it seems t
Phonological Universals, Janua Linguarum, Series Minor, 72, Moutoun, The Hague.
And I reframed his explanation in the context of Peirce’s theory of signs in “Wild Language” which can be found here: https://umich.academia.edu/CharlesPyle
Charles Pyle
From: Helmut Raulien
Sent: Sunday, Novembe
underlying them.
Charles Pyle
https://umich.academia.edu/CharlesPyle
From: Helmut Raulien
Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2020 11:00 AM
To: Peirce-L
Subject: [PEIRCE-L] multiple-valued logic
List,
As Peircean semiotics is a three-valued logic, I think it bears rel
althy cell.
Edwina
On Sun 22/11/20 12:05 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina,
Yes, I agree, that the so-called progressives are not per se better argumenting or more ethical people than conservatives. An overreacting progressive can be a real monster. But you told me, that &qu
uld define an open perspective as - open to change. That's all.
Edwina
On Sun 22/11/20 10:59 AM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
List,
As Peircean semiotics is a three-valued logic, I think it bears relevance for the discussion about multiple-valued logic. But I have the impression,
List,
As Peircean semiotics is a three-valued logic, I think it bears relevance for the discussion about multiple-valued logic. But I have the impression, that multipleness is sometimes explained away by just adding a "maybe" to the values "yes" and "no" (e.g. Lukasiewicz). I think, this is
Jon, List,
I think, an aspect of the distinction between normative and descriptive sciences is, whether the scientist belongs to the object of inquiry or not. If he*she belongs to the object, he*she on one hand is influenced by it, and on the other hand influences it, has a responsibility for
Supplement: On the other hand, if ants or bees would evolve to intelligent species, I find it likely, that with intelligence would come individualism.
Jon, List,
Minimum suffering can be achieved with two different principles, the categorical imperative, and the utilitaristic
Jon, List,
Minimum suffering can be achieved with two different principles, the categorical imperative, and the utilitaristic principle. In real situations, applying both often leads to contradiction. So, to get from is to ought, there has to be an agreement, which of both principles is the
Thirdness. The function of Thirdness within the triad is to introduce a continuity of morphology such that entropy cannot become dominant.
Edwina
On Fri 23/10/20 4:13 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, Robert, List,
I think that information aka negentropy is not a cou
On Fri 23/10/20 4:13 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, Robert, List,
I think that information aka negentropy is not a counterweight to entropy, because it depends on dissipation, and the amount of produced information cannot exceed the amount of entropy produced with its prod
Supplement: I want to add, that the universe´s density might not decrease due to its expansion, because with the increase of potential energy, new mass particles come out of the virtuality. The potential energy of the universe has the same amount as all other energy, including mass, so I
Edwina, Robert, List,
I think that information aka negentropy is not a counterweight to entropy, because it depends on dissipation, and the amount of produced information cannot exceed the amount of entropy produced with its production.
I think, the counterweight for entropy is the
Gary, List,
I think, that the quote by Ghandi: "Gandhi, in commenting on the Gita, says ‘If we wish to give up sin, we should give up virtue too.", is as false as Adorno claiming that there is no right life within the false one ("Minima Moralia"). To focus on higher wisdom alone solves no
List, I am posting it again now, with the WAS- stuff underneath, so you can read what at all I am talking about.
Perhaps you have seen, that I have pondered how to express possibility with alpha-graphs. I still suspect, that my result "A(A(A))" is erratic somehow: Why not just write "A" to
List,
Perhaps you have seen, that I have pondered how to express possibility with alpha-graphs. I still suspect, that my result "A(A(A))" is erratic somehow: Why not just write "A" to indicate, that A is part of the universe of discourse, and thus a possibility. But being a part of the
Supp-supplement: But this problem might be solved by just writing the possible into the sheet of assertion, to say, that such a thing generally exists. So: "A(A(A))" would mean: "Possibly A" or "A is possible". Or not again? I am suspecting everything.
Supplement: No, Stop! I wrote
Supplement: No, Stop! I wrote no good! " "Unicorns exist" XOR NOT "Unicorns exist" ", and "If unicorns exist, unicorns exist", are both true, but "Possibly unicorns exist" is false. So my XOR-translation to alpha-graphs is false, and broken cuts are justified. Sorry.
John, List,
Jon, John, List,
I think that "implication, imagination, or belief" mostly do not sit in the symbols of notation such as cuts, but in the variables. Are they thoroughly cecked out premisses, or not? If the object does not affect the interpreter, they may be, then it is analysis, and the
Gary, Jon, List,
I would say, and I think it does not contradict Peirce, that a law is a rule that is valid in a certain region: A juristic law in a county or state, a natural law in the universe, a law of logic or mathematics perhaps in every universe, though we cannot check that. So a
autonomous
abstraction get their hold on our minds it is almost impossible to
reconstitute or synthesize what we've torn asunder, if only in our
own minds. The ounce of prevention here is always keeping in mind
that from which all abstractions are abstracted, living experience.
Regards,
Jon
O
f compartmentality and the illusions of autonomous
abstraction get their hold on our minds it is almost impossible to
reconstitute or synthesize what we've torn asunder, if only in our
own minds. The ounce of prevention here is always keeping in mind
that from which all abstractions are abstracted, living ex
Supp-supplement: And I think, this is the core of the natural fallacy: That you cannot conclude from "Is" to "Ought". I think, the natural fallacy does not exist, it only is a fallacy, if you do not regard the "Want", the voluntarity. Ethics are not based on "Ought", but about
Jon, Gary, Gary, List,
I merely want to talk about the quote "there will be no such thing as esthetic goodness" (Peirce). How did he mean that? Did he mean, that there is no universal esthetic good- or badness? Maybe, but I think, that there is esthetic good- and badness that counts alike for
dexicality and become isolated intellectual constructs. This isolation from indexical reality results in a distortion of the system within the real world - where contact with the real world becomes perverted and insane.
Edwina
On Sat 04/07/20 1:56 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, List,
I don´t think that rightism is the same as individualism. I is collective ideology too, though more particularistic than leftism. It claims a supremacy of a particular collective such as "race" or nation. Though leftism sometimes also is particularist, classist. Leftism, if it is
Im agree with Edwina. I also agree, that a perfect society is one of social sphere omnipresence and omnipotence, leaving the individuals merely spontaneity, and no will. They are reduced to firstness, but what is done with this their residual spontaneity, secondness and thirdness, is only a matter
Jon, List,
I like very much your supply of a mathematical approach to all of this! Though I am disable of understanding the formulas.
I understood, that the relation between the object and the interpretant is an induced one, mathematically a composed one, and ennotated or projected by the
List,
I have problems with this kind of cosmology. On one hand it is astounding, that Peirce´s cosmology, like his whole philosophy, seems to have anticipated many aspects of modern hypotheses (e.g. the hypothesis that there will be a GUT), and scientific insights. On the other hand it seems
List,
The difference between mediation and relation rings a bell to me. There are two kinds of relation: Relatio rationalis and relatio naturalis. Relatio rationalis is a by a mind supposed relation, without the need of both parts actually to take part, or communicate with each other. Relatio
Supplement: At the end of my post I meant "utilitarist maxim", not "universalist maxim".
Jerry, List,
I am sure, that waiting for the action of others does not mean not doing and thinking anything while waiting. The professor is talking to young students, so he puts the esteem on them,
Jerry, List,
I am sure, that waiting for the action of others does not mean not doing and thinking anything while waiting. The professor is talking to young students, so he puts the esteem on them, but he does not superestimate them over his own age group.
An esthetical or ethical sign has
s degenerate and consists in a mere resemblance between them. I call a sign which stands for something merely because it resembles it, an icon.
In this case it is a quality of "the concrete thing that represents" that makes the sign; as a red thing to represent the quality of being red
between them. I call a sign which stands for something merely because it resembles it, an icon.
In this case it is a quality of "the concrete thing that represents" that makes the sign; as a red thing to represent the quality of being red, or the blood of a person represented
not a problem.
Edwina
On Tue 09/06/20 12:34 PM , Helmut Raulien h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Gary F., Edwina, List,
Isn´t it so, that there are topics, about which Peirce did not write so much, but other writers did? For example, the online "Commens Dictionary" is named after the commens,
Gary F., Edwina, List,
Isn´t it so, that there are topics, about which Peirce did not write so much, but other writers did? For example, the online "Commens Dictionary" is named after the commens, which was a major topic of the last discussions, but if you look it up in the dictionary, there
John, List,
I think, that commens and mind fusion is a much better metaphor than "swarm intelligence". The latter, falsely, I think, suggests, that a swarm can be more intelligent than an individual. The ranger-writer Peter Wohlleben wrote an example: The bees in a hive have communicated the
.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 7:25 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Supplement: I did not want to question your view, perhaps both views/models are justified, one is objective, and one subjective. Would it be i
s, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 7:25 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Supplement: I did not want to question your view, perhaps both views
28. Mai 2020 um 22:26 Uhr
"Helmut Raulien"
wrote:
Jon, List,
The possibility of the immediate object (similar with the immediate interpretant) you describe is a relation between the sign and the world, mathematically correct, I assume: The subset of all tuples of sig
Jon, List,
The possibility of the immediate object (similar with the immediate interpretant) you describe is a relation between the sign and the world, mathematically correct, I assume: The subset of all tuples of sign-elements and world-elements (s,w), for which is valid "s may denote w". But
Edwina, Jon, Robert, Jeff, List,
I am wondering about the difference between Telos and Purpose: Is it so, that Telos is a Purpose, but not one of the individual´s mind, but of a mind of a system on another classificational level, or, speaking with Salthe, at another subsumption level? Then the
Jon, List,
Peirce is not necessarily always right, is he? "For evolution is nothing more nor less than the working out of a definite end", is theism and speculation, isn´t it? One may also assume, that evolution is continuous adaption without an end. And when he wrote "A final cause may be
you place this final interpretant in the hexadic sign...
Best
Robert
Le mar. 19 mai 2020 à 17:08, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> a écrit :
Edwina, List,
I think, that "final" in "final interpretant" is not meant like "in the future" or predest
. Mai 2020 um 21:08 Uhr
"robert marty"
wrote:
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 <h.raul...@gmx.de> a éc
Edwina, List,
I think, that "final" in "final interpretant" is not meant like "in the future" or predestined, but just, that to everything could exist a unique, unambiguous representation of its momentary state and being. If a thing is blurred or ambiguous, this vagueness or ambiguity would be
List
do I understand it correctly, that the paradoxon here is, that the final interpretant is the first element in logical order, but the last in temporal order? In this case I would propose a solution attempt like this: The truth works as a motive, a quest for it, although it is not yet
, far from the real empirical objective world.
Edwina
On Tue 12/05/20 3:57 PM , "Helmut Raulien" h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina,
Haha! I cannot explain the real world! It is a mystery to me. I am just trying to understand my own experiences a little bit, by trying to t
d.
So- you can take an experience[s] and it's best not to use Peirce's examples but one's own experiences - and try to see what is, semiosically [ie, morphologically and cognitively] actually happening. I don't see that a focus on terms gets one very far with such a task.
Edwina
On Tue 12/05/20 2:59
street cry.
Edwina
On Tue 12/05/20 2:04 PM , "Helmut Raulien" h.raul...@gmx.de sent:
Edwina, List,
yes, I will think of some examples. Before I know, whether what I wrote is correct, I give the example about the dicentic indexical legisign and its involutional and determinational cons
ot;Edwina Taborsky"
wrote:
Helmut - I think it would be helpful to provide a real life example! That is - semiosis has to move beyond words and yes, beyond the delights of tables and formulae - and into the real world. How do these 'signs' actually function in the real world?
Edwina
On Tu
nal Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 11:35 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Correction: "mode of determination like in "O-S-I".
List,
as the basis f
Correction: "mode of determination like in "O-S-I".
List,
as the basis for Peitce´s 66 sign classes are these trichotomies:
1st, According to the Mode of Apprehension of the Sign itself,
2nd, According to the Mode of Presentation of the Immediate Object,
3rd, According to
List,
as the basis for Peitce´s 66 sign classes are these trichotomies:
1st, According to the Mode of Apprehension of the Sign itself,
2nd, According to the Mode of Presentation of the Immediate Object,
3rd, According to the Mode of Being of the Dynamical Object,
4th, According to
sopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:51 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Jon, List,
Thank you, Jon! I do have to say, that have had a concept of composition, of which Robert and Jon A.
n/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:51 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote:
Jon, List,
Thank you, Jon! I do have to say, that have had a concept of composition, of which Robert and Jon A.S. said it is not good, and it rather is a
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Relation_composition#Graph-theoretic_picture
Regards,
Jon
On 5/6/2020 12:51 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:
> Jon, List,
> Thank you, Jon! I do have to say, that have had a concept of composition, of
> which Robert and Jon A.S. said it is not good, and it rather is all about
> determ
need
a bit of reformatting, so I'll go address those issues and
return to these questions as soon as I can.
Regards,
Jon
On 4/12/2020 3:21 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote:> Jon, All,
> I vaguely remember about irreducibility and reducibility something like, that
> a triad is compositionally (or
iewed it as following directly from his synechism--"If all things are continuous, the universe must be undergoing a continuous growth from non-existence to existence" (CP 1.175, c. 1893).
Regards,
Jon S.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 1:59 AM Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de&
which the past and the present exist but not the future. In fact, he evidently viewed it as following directly from his synechism--"If all things are continuous, the universe must be undergoing a continuous growth from non-existence to existence" (CP 1.175, c. 1893).
Regards,
Jo
201 - 300 of 1018 matches
Mail list logo
