Re: [PEIRCE-L] on the reality of objects

Clark, list: How is reality a process of semiosis if it's independent of what is thought concerning the object? "The opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate, is what we mean by the truth, and the object represented in this opinion is the real. That is the way I

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: 6 vectors and 3 inference patterns

Gary F and list, I fail to see why you picked out that portion of the quote. So, if the logician looks to the ethicist for the aims of action... the ethicist does what? There is a subtle but *huge* difference between ascertaining what ends are possible, which is the business of ethics, and

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

Jun 21, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Clark Goble <cl...@lextek.com> wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2016, at 12:47 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > You said, "If I understand Peirce, then the logic of indices works via > icons." > > What, then, distinguishes indic

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

Clark, list: You said, "If I understand Peirce, then the logic of indices works via icons." What, then, distinguishes indices from icons in a context for logic of indices? ___ Does, then, a logic of icons work via indices? The question naturally follows, what distinguishes icons from

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

Clark, list: Here is a nice presentation by Burger that melts into our current problem with no mention of Peirce: cf., starting at 5:22 and on... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GWaM__oRlA Best, Jerry R On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Cl

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

govern synthetic forms of inference”? when we argue over terms such as “logic” and “determination” without a perfect foundation? Best, Jerry Rhee On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard < jeffrey.down...@nau.edu> wrote: > Hello, > > > Unlike Jerry R. and Kristi,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

dex, symbol…poet, scientist, philosopher...promise, performance, truth Other than immersing yourself in an inquiry that makes use of icon, index, symbol directly; if not this, which? Best, Jerry Rhee On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Clark Goble <cl...@lextek.com> wrote: > > On Ju

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

of symbol… Hth, Jerry Rhee On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Jerry LR Chandler < jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> wrote: > Jerry R: > > > On Jun 16, 2016, at 11:47 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Does this qualify?

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

approach, you appear to have a well-honed set of > philosophical generalities which are, for your purposes, applicable > universally. > > So, I suggest we not waste list-reader’s time and close out this thread. > > Cheers > > Jerry > > > > On J

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Parker's propositions on the development of CSP's categories of Logic

, Jerry LR Chandler < jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> wrote: > Hi Jerry R: > > On Jun 16, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've never read FS but if the question is *what is it that is being > interpreted by two different interpre

Re: [PEIRCE-L] How do Peirce's categories best fit the study of the arts?

e analyzed into dyads.* *...The argument of this book has been developed in the mind of the author, substantially as it is presented, as a following out of these three conceptions, in a sort of game of “"follow my leader" from one field of thought into another.*" hth, Jerry

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: How do Peirce's categories best fit the study of the arts?

Hi all, I assert that esthetics, ethics and logic can be directly assessed in a paradigmatic example: Promoting convergence: the phi spiral in abduction of mouse corneal behaviors. The example is useful because it doesn’t simply make claims. It puts a single, unitary example of inquiry

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: How do Peirce's categories best fit the study of the arts?

Hi Adrian, list, I believe you are simply going through the process of defending your triad but ‘experience’ is a particularly complicated label for beginners. For example, “…*only three, Quality, Reaction, Mediation. Having obtained this list of three kinds of elements of experience…"*

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Six categorial vectors; three categorial mirrors, was, The categorial "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'.

one's background experience, but it > shouldn't be too difficult to imagine--even if one didn't grow up on a farm. > > --Jeff > > Jeffrey Downard > Associate Professor > Department of Philosophy > Northern Arizona University > (o) 928 523-8354 > __

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Six categorial vectors; three categorial mirrors, was, The categorial "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'.

reference about (object, sign, > interpretant) over (sign, object, interpretant). > > I don't at all undertstand what you may be suggesting here; that is, I > have no idea what you mean when you speak of a "preference" in this > regard.since all Peircean semioticians see o-

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Objective Idealism

Hi Neal, list, I’ve read a couple papers on Peirce’s Objective Idealism. In the appendix of "Peirce's Objective Idealism: A Defense", Claudine Tiercelin mentions that even experts have trouble classifying Peirce as both a realist and an idealist. Without itemizing discussion points (e.g.,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Pragmatism - atoms, molecules, entanglement

Stephen and list, Can you think of any advantages to thinking about modern cell biophysics as Peircean semiotic? Wouldn’t that just create more work for biologists/physicists to learn Peircean ideas and for Peircean scholars to learn biophysics? Asking scholars to adopt alternative

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Pragmatism - atoms, molecules, entanglement

...pathos, ethos, logos... Best, J On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 9:01 PM, CLARK GOBLE <cl...@lextek.com> wrote: > > On Feb 1, 2016, at 6:42 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > How about instead of “…because Peirce”, we try “…because Bruner”? There > is an intense

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Relevance in context

Hi Gary f and list! Here are some quotes direct from Promoting convergence: the phi spiral in abduction of mouse corneal behaviors: “Sufficient explanations are three-term relations between a topic, a contrast-class, and a relevance relation, which “specifies what sort of thing is being

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Relevance in context

y which different forms of hypothesis partition the process (CP 7.218)." Best, Jerry On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Gary f and list! > > Here are some quotes direct from Promoting convergence: the phi spiral in > abduction of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is there a phaneron?

Hi everyone, An update on *this* phaneron and actions toward reaching the three categories: “…I examine the phaneron and I endeavor to sort out its elements according to the complexity of their structure. I thus reach my three categories." ~Peirce The surprising fact C (microcephaly) is

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Six categorial vectors; three categorial mirrors, was, The categorial "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'.

, where should we look to achieve consensus opinion? Best, Jerry Rhee :) On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> wrote: > List, > > At the conclusion of my most recent post in this thread I offered trikonic > vectorial analyses of the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Six categorial vectors; three categorial mirrors, was, The categorial "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'.

. At the moment, I just can't envision > it. > > Best, > > Gary R > > > > > > [image: Gary Richmond] > > *Gary Richmond* > *Philosophy and Critical Thinking* > *Communication Studies* > *LaGuardia College of the City University of New York* > *C 745

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Six categorial vectors; three categorial mirrors, was, The categorial "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'.

suspect this problem extends to preference about (object, sign, interpretant) over (sign, object, interpretant). Thanks, J On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:03 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Gary, > > > > I'm not sure what you're saying exactly but in Anderson’s Ev

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Six categorial vectors; three categorial mirrors, was, The categorial "mirror image" of 'determination' and 'representation'.

> 'representation'. > > Jeffrey and list: > > So, to be clear, in your example, it was Result (we would see a pile of > corn), Rule (from bag left all winter, fall out, cows pick seeds- different > rules for different contexts/representamen/sign), Case (old bag of corn, > new

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: How do Peirce's categories best fit the study of the arts?

Hi everyone, I would say that's a skeptical attitude. One of the reasons given for justifying abduction is to provide a response to skepticism. A response: Firstness: object (that is observed) = phi spiral on mouse corneal epithelial cells Secondness: sign/representamen = FEM model and not

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: How do Peirce's categories best fit the study of the arts?

to sunflower seeds on the head, or the swirls on pine > cones and many other plant morphologies. > > Cheers > > Jerry > > > > On Feb 15, 2016, at 6:42 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi jerry c, > > Thanks for asking! My response is..

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is there a phaneron?

Hi everyone, I think the following is a good example of phaneroscopy, a kind of survey of the sum total of experiences to get at some generality through scrutiny but absent judgments about good/bad.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry

in an earnest way. That is, that of First is so tender you cannot touch it without spoiling it. Best, Jerry Rhee On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Jon Awbrey <jawb...@att.net> wrote: > Post : Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry : 7 > > http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2016/

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry

Hi Edwina, It clarifies. For instance, what would you say is the "Object-as-it-is-meant-to-be-understood, i.e., the dynamic object" in phi spiral abduction? Best, Jerry Rhee On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote: > In reply to Gary,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry

aven't been following that thread. > > Edwina > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> > *To:* Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> > *Cc:* Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> ; Peirce-L > <peirce-l@list.iupui.edu>

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry

in this opinion is the real." ~Peirce Best, Jerry Rhee On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 6:28 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > :) > > Edwina, > No worries...it's hard to go to something from nothing if one doesn't see > the connection...even if there is something there, a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry

Hi Clark, list, There is a phenomenon of mouse corneal striping/twisting/spiraling that is unexplained. For instance: “Corneal stripes and spirals are also visualised in some human conditions (Bron 1973) and are unexplained. They may reflect failure of centripetally migrating cells to meet

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

Mar 10, 2016, at 12:14 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > To me, we are talking about whether Feyerabend or Peirce can offer a > definite suggestion on how to proceed if we are frozen with respect to > advancing on a problem. To say there’s no systematic way to proceed is

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

Clark, Are you not participating in unhelpful exposition about something about which much can be said, of which you are only talking about a small part? Technically, Peirce's method is not about meaningfulness as it is about clarifying the interpretant at the end of inquiry, which deals with

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

. So, let's wait... :) Best, Jerry Rhee On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 2:04 AM, John Collier <colli...@ukzn.ac.za> wrote: > Jerry, > > > > The example I gave (bucket experiment) involved genuine doubt about what > at least some (e.g., Newton) took to be a real world situati

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

ion really amounts to "What is CP 5.189; one, two, three" and what does that entail? Best, Jerry Rhee On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Jerry LR Chandler < jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> wrote: > John, Clark, List: > > > On Mar 9, 2016, at 1:59 AM, John Collier <colli...

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

lieve actually makes sense. I don’t think this is a normal > condition, though. We often do have ideas about the world that are both > coherent and accurate. And we can discover bad ones and dispose of them. > > > > John Collier > > Professor Emeritus and Senior Research Ass

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

and connotation will resolve themselves. hth, Jerry Rhee On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Jerry LR Chandler < jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> wrote: > List: > I fear that the distinction between connotation and denotation is being > lost in this discussion. > Cheers > Jerry &g

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Determination, etc.

Hi Jon and list, How about a test of our understanding? If there is one statement that can determine what is meant by Peirce’s theory of abduction, then is the following an over or under-determination? Is it exact and complete? Is it perfect? Why or why not? The surprising fact, C,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Determination, etc.

”. But it’s really a matter of *if not this,* *which*? I hope that determines it. Jerry Rhee On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jon and list, > > > > How about a test of our understanding? > > > > If there is one

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Systems Of Interpretation - Contrasting the diagrams of ammonia and the handedness of carbon compounds.

gt; > You wrote: > > > Just a friendly public service announcement: >> >> >> If your interest is in genotype/phenotype mapping (i.e., relation between >> mutation and change in organism), talk of atoms, molecules and valences is >> considered bizarre.

[PEIRCE-L] How does one justify something like a "completeness" in a logic of vagueness?

) After a century of having thought about this problem, what does the Peirce community have to offer that inflicts more upon it to all who investigate? What exactly is "complete" about a logic of vagueness? Best, Jerry Rhee - PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on &

Re: [PEIRCE-L] How does one justify something like a "completeness" in a logic of vagueness?

an asterisk by Hartshorne and Weiss? Best, Jerry R On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 4:23 AM, <kirst...@saunalahti.fi> wrote: > Hi Jerry Rhee, > > You misunderstand (misinterpret) the sentence by CSP, so your questions go > all wrong. > > On should take time to understand properly,

Re: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Determination, etc.

Thanks Gary! Your comments are noted and appreciated. Good luck with your work! Best, Jerry R On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:12 PM, wrote: > Helmut, > > > > Yes, by all means write it down step by step, and think it through before > you share it with us, whether it’s a “new

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Determination, etc.

of fractal spirals on your webpage? Thanks! Jerry Rhee On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:25 AM, <g...@gnusystems.ca> wrote: > List, > > > > Another long post, this time mostly relating the Peircean concepts of > determination and causation. The formatting and embedded links will work >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Determination, etc.

iking them...The phi spiral is a fractal and the opportunity might be there for you to experience on a natural material. With best wishes, Jerry Rhee On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 10:19 AM, <g...@gnusystems.ca> wrote: > Jerry R, > > > > I hope you don’t mind if I preface my re

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Determination, etc.

nly sometimes. Best, Jerry R On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Gary f and list, > > Thank you for your deep consideration and response to my questions. > > I would ask you to examine your answer in ten years. This notion

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Systems Of Interpretation - Contrasting the diagrams of ammonia and the handedness of carbon compounds.

s. > > Nevertheless I agree with with you our assertion that : > > Even talking of mutations in individual genes and consequences on > phenotype is problematic for many situations. > > perhaps the reality of nature is more perplex than your imagination allows > for. > > Cheers

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Systems Of Interpretation - Contrasting the diagrams of ammonia and the handedness of carbon compounds.

Hi all, Just a friendly public service announcement: If your interest is in genotype/phenotype mapping (i.e., relation between mutation and change in organism), talk of atoms, molecules and valences is considered bizarre. I say this as a biologist and because talk of such things is

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

Tom, Jon, list, If I may, and making the argument explicit: The surprising fact, *C (coolness)*, is observed. But if *A (rain)* were true, *C* would be a matter of course. Hence, there is reason to suspect that *A* is true. Therefore, it’s likely to rain. On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:26

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

Tom, Vegas?! Lucky you. Weather here in Chicago is cool. :) Sure, that'll work. But ultimately, we're talking about a method to truth. For me, what you propose is perfectly fine because it's a matter of putting words to phenomenon. Also, when talking semiotic, we should be talking about

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce on Knowledge Representation

://www.iupui.edu/~arisbe/menu/library/bycsp/L75/ver1/l75v1-01.htm hth, Jerry Rhee On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Jerry LR Chandler < jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com> wrote: > Mike, List: > > Thanks for posting your views on your interpretation of CSP’s writings in > relation

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce on Knowledge Representation

not the same as consciousness. When you > become conscious of that feeling, you've moved out of Firstness. > > That's as far as I've gone. > > Edwina Taborsky > > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> > *To:* Jerry LR Cha

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce on Knowledge Representation

alysis...I don't see it as > evaluating the data, simply gathering it. > > Edwina > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> > *To:* Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> > *Cc:* Jerry LR Chandler <jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce on Knowledge Representation

. Best, Jerry Rhee On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote: > Val Daniel - thank you also pointing this out. I've argued against that > space-enclosing equilateral triangle for years. It is NOT representative of > the Peircean triad; instead,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

Hi Jon, list, Despite your noble efforts to address it, the problem continues to persist. It appears it doesn't even matter that you're right. What would you say is a best strategy for fixing the problem of communicating Peirce correctly other than what you or anyone else is doing? Are they

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

one which distinguished his "pragmaticism" from other less correct interpretations of his own famous maxim.**”* ~ Potter Best, Jerry Rhee On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Jon Awbrey <jawb...@att.net> wrote: > Post : Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry : 8 > > http:

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

for satisfaction cannot be naturally overcome. To have the erotic art is to have the capacity to get absorbed in the question at hand and never forget oneself. ” ~Seth Benardete, starting ~32:38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rioS0H-EHdw one, two, three…Beauty, Goodness, Justice Best, Jerry

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction : Analogy, Inquiry

Hi all, It seems paradoxical to me that a Peircean doesn't believe in Peirce's method to inferencing truth under uncertainty. There must be a way out of this dilemma...one, two, three...CP 5.189. Best, Jerry R On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:59 AM, John Collier wrote: > List, >

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Determination, etc.

uine inquiry > may be had from the study I carried out back when I was working to view > Peirce's theories of inference, information, and inquiry from a systems > analysis perspective on a systems engineering platform. > > Functional Logic : Inquiry and Analogy > > http://intersci

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

AFFIRMS > [not generates/creates] a Rule and does nothing to change that rule. > Entirely different process. > > Edwina > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> > *To:* Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> > *Cc:*

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

hat then, are colloquial standards? Finally, it is true that Peirce’s formulation has an if/then in it. But if we consider that section at the future limit of inquiry, the if/then is gone. A *is* C because it’s true as matter of course by definition. With best regards and thanks to all, Je

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce on the Definition of Determination

tive claim... hth, Jerry Rhee On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Stephen C. Rose <stever...@gmail.com> wrote: > If there is still debate about what is a first and a second, as I must > assume from seeing these posts, are there any examples of actual results > from triadic w

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

Thanks Ben, Kirsti and list... So, would you say that CP 5.189 qualifies as syllogism, i.e., is it "hypothesis" based on what you know of what Peirce said on Aristotle? Why or why not? What's the predicate, subject and middle term? Thanks, Jerry R On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:19 PM,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

…it suffices to indicate the matter to the wise.” ~Strauss, *Persecution and the Art of Writing* Best*,* Jerry Rhee On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard < jeffrey.down...@nau.edu> wrote: > List, > > > For those who (like me) might like o

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Association of Categories

Jon, Eeg…where to start. Actually, I appreciate your putting your thoughts out there. But it’s extremely rough and wrong. Yet it’s helpful because these are things I thought were already matter of fact but I am finding many are operating with different definitions. Also, one should NOT

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

Edwina, Thank you for your continued patience and admonitions. I take it that if I can convince you, I can convince others. So, you say that I *ought not* to state the following frame because it’s wrong: *“If p then q. = “But if A were true, C would be a matter of course”* *

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

tant (What is CP 5.189)? What is the truth? Best, Jerry Rhee On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ben, list, > > You gave Peircean examples whereas the rule (or law) is *already known* > either before or after the surprising fact.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

now and I will leave you with: * *What are your reasons for thinking that a deductive syllogism is something that Peirce even cared to elaborate upon when others have already done so sufficiently?* *How is your reading suggestive of future action? * *With best wishes,* *

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

Jon, Uwe Wirth's essay relates to ours. I don't agree with everything he says (and have not read it carefully) but there are overlapping themes, such as an explicit account of B as "background-presupposition". http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/p-abdwir.htm Where do you suppose he came up

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

Edwina, Your statement, “I don't think introducing passion/emotion into the logical format is relevant” is precisely the point. It’s typically the case that when the structure of the argument needs modifying, the reason given is that you can’t change it because…the past. Regardless, the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

for > abduction. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 7:02 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

ndeed the basis of > information/knowledge; that's basic to Peirce [and Aristotle]. The 'input > data' via the senses is analyzed by reason. Reason is an act of logic. > > Edwina > > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> > *To:* Jon Alan

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Peirce on the Definition of Determination

Hi Jeff, If you’re after a common sense perspective, then you’d have to look at Greek philosophy since for Socrates, his "turn to the study of human things was based...upon a new approach to the understanding of all things...a “return to ‘sobriety’ and ‘moderation’ from the ‘madness’ of his

[PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

of syllogism? Would you say the following is a syllogism? Why or why not? The surprising fact, C, is observed. But if A were true, C would be a matter of course. Hence, there is reason to suspect that A is true. Thanks for any input, Jerry Rhee - PEIRCE-L subscribers

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Association of Categories

I don't mean to pick a fight but this problem of underdetermination and intentionality of abduction has always been a sore spot with me. A few questions off the cuff: Where’s genuine doubt in the bean and bags example? If esthetics, ethics and logic are not included, then how do you assess

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

this event is explained by this hypothesis.* I hope I presented myself clearly and thanks again for your help, Jerry R On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Would you mind clarifying what you mean by "middle term C is > *undistributed*", ple

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

s, Justice... Best, Jerry Rhee On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard < jeffrey.down...@nau.edu> wrote: > Gary R., Ben, List, > > > A few quick thoughts about some recent comments concerning abductive > inference: > > > 1. Peirce uses the terminolo

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

bol... Spiritedness over desire as ally of reason is on the way to a well-ordered soul. Hth, Jerry Rhee On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com > wrote: > Jerry R., List: > > It seems odd to cite something that you admit not having read carefull

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Three inference patterns

Awesome! Thank you both for your expertise. :) Jerry Rhee On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jerry, > > You're attempting to discuss apples and oranges here. Here are the basics > as given in the syllabus for a fir

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

e...chance, law, habit-taking. Best, Jerry Rhee On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jerry R., List: > > You apparently find the absence of the letter B in CP 5.189 very > surprising--thus demanding of an explanation--and

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

investigation. The truth is in the future, that is, there is not yet a clear conclusion. Hth, Jerry Rhee On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jon, > > ha! Thank you for your honest and clear input. I submit that if you were > to accep

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Three inference patterns

! Best, Jerry Rhee On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Helmut Raulien <h.raul...@gmx.de> wrote: > Gary, list, > in my understanding, the conclusion is always the last of the three lines, > and the three lines are written underneath each other according to time, in > the sense of what c

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Three inference patterns

Thanks Gary, What about my last question? Would you say there's an intention to deduction or using syllogisms or is that so ambiguous we leave it alone? I guess the reason I ask is because if everyone agrees that all swans are white, then there's no problem...but it's often the case that

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

Jon, Thanks for making your objections clear! I must to say...I'm pretty proud of myself for my explication above. *pat*pat* (myself on my back). :) Best, Jerry Rhee On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jerry R., List: > > Thank

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

erefore C > This is called the *modus ponens*. > > So, it would be > IF A is true, then C is a matter of course > [I surmise that] A is true > Therefore, C is a matter of course. > > Edwina > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

logism. [Fallacy of Four Terms] > > Edwina > > - Original Message - > *From:* Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> > *To:* Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> > *Cc:* Peirce-L <peirce-l@list.iupui.edu> > *Sent:* Saturday, April 23, 2016 8:25 PM > *Subjec

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Is CP 5.189 a syllogism?

quot;, that I deduce mathematically the principles of logic. [...]” ~* NEM IV* Best, Jerry Rhee :) On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 8:34 PM, Edwina Taborsky <tabor...@primus.ca> wrote: > No. You still have the Fallacy of Four Terms. > > And you've added another syllogistic fallacy: the Fa

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Association of Categories

My apologies to Gary and the list. Best, Jerry Rhee On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Gary Richmond <gary.richm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jerry wrote: "I don't mean to pick a fight" > > It has been my experience that when people announce that they "don't mean > to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: 6 vectors and 3 inference patterns

*Then what is your meaning? When speaking of uninviting objects, I mean those which do not pass from one sensation to the opposite; inviting objects are those which do; in this latter case the sense coming upon the object, whether at a distance or near, gives no more vivid idea of anything in

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: 6 vectors and 3 inference patterns

for all who investigate is *hard*, and it must start *here*, at the... Hth, Jerry Rhee On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com > wrote: > Gary F., List: > > I suppose that it is possible; I would have to go back and re-read her > paper, then gi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] 6 vectors and 3 inference patterns

Clark, list: That's yet another reason to start at *the* and not *but* or *hence*... Best, Jerry R On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Clark Goble <cl...@lextek.com> wrote: > > On May 18, 2016, at 1:15 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In the *1980s*, the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] 6 vectors and 3 inference patterns

reasoning may be, not because of the nature of the subject it considers, but because of the manner in which it is supported by the ratiocinative instinct.* Best, Jerry Rhee On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <jonalanschm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Clark, List: > > Jerry R

Re: [PEIRCE-L] "The empty brain"

Two and not Three, therefore, incomplete. Best, Jerry R On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Gary Richmond wrote: > List, > > I recently read a rther controversial essay in *Aeon* by Robert Epstein > on what the author considers to be the "faulty logic of the IP metaphor"

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: 6 vectors and 3 inference patterns

https://woodybelangia.com/tag/dialectic/ (4) *Noetic wholeness* (*noesis*) is the transcendent goal of all thinking, the satisfaction of *eros* in true knowledge. *Noesis* is the full integration of doubt and belief. All relevant questions are answered and satisfied, without remainder. hth, J

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Leading Principle

absolute first and last, and brings them into relationship." So, what grounds your belief for how we ought to start (whether with object/thing or concept/rule) when there is a matter of difference of opinion? What's your leading principle? Best, Jerry Rhee On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 4:17 PM,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Leading Principle

ators of good will. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com&g

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Leading Principle

*poring* over... Best, J On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:25 PM, Jerry Rhee <jerryr...@gmail.com> wrote: > "This is going to be *very* simple..." > > Jon, you're right. There will be many disagreements along the way. > > But hopefully, after pouring over the ma

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: 6 vectors and 3 inference patterns

So, what now of beans and bags? p's and q's, even... Best, Jerry R On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Gary Richmond wrote: > Gary F, Jon S, List, > > Gary F. wrote: "maybe [artists] are driven to think this way by an > irrational urge to create, to do something that

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >