that the semiosic Sign is(5469-1)
a single set of three interactive Relations, while
you consider that it is a 'single triadic relation'.
Jon Awbrey and I recently came to the agreement that
The Peircean sign can be viewed as a mathematical (5469-2)
category characterized
Sung,
I appreciate your sticking with this, as I think the potential connections
between category theory,
relation theory in general, and triadic sign relations in particular is a topic well worth pursuing.
At present, however, I need to keep my focus on Peirce's 1870 Logic of Relatives or
Thanks, Robert, I have added this to the pile of fusionable materials.
Perhaps we can generate a modicum of synergy before our sun goes nova.
Regards,
Jon
Robert Marty wrote:
My contribution using category theory :
Good Grief, are you understanding why I call it the bi-semiotics list now,
Gary?
Then again, semiology 2.0 would probably be more accurate.
Jon
Sungchul Ji wrote:
Edwina, Howard, Vinicius, List,
We have been having this, what I call the, Taborsky-Pattee debate on (the
meaning of) symbols
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 10.4
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/03/26/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-10-4/
Posted : March 26, 2014 at 9:30 am
Peircers,
just 2 bits ...
a bit of segue ...
From now on I will use the forms of analysis exemplified
Peircers,
Recent discussions of purpose in semiotics remind me once more of a recurring
theme:
Jon Awbrey | 9 Sep 20:22 2011
[http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.inquiry/3713]
Objects, Objectives, Objectivity
I am constantly reminded of this favorite line from Peirce:
No longer wondered
As far as ends go, if it's good enough for Goethe it's good enough for me.
Das Ewig-Weibliche zieht uns hinan.
Cheers,
Jon
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com
On Mar 26, 2014, at 5:32 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard jeffrey.down...@nau.edu
wrote:
Jon, List,
Your reference to the Latin and Greek
John, Kees, List,
This bit of sem{e}io-arch{a}eology has certainly excavated a wealth of fascinating historical
nuggets, but my own vain ventures in language policing tell me that usage will be determined by
almost anything but historical accuracy, more often by the way that newfangled words
Frank,
Thanks a million for your time and obvious care in reviewing my notes!
You catch me entering on a period of intermittent travel, so it may be
the middle/end of the month before we can get down to details, but I'll
start now in stepwise refinement mode, with a few off the cuff remarks
and
Frank,
I'll take up your points one or two at a time, in no particular order,
just responding to whatever stimuli bring something to mind right off.
FR: I took the time to follow the three links and read through the webpages,
and came up with some notes, some as commentary and others as
Thread Previous:
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/20140403180003/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/12469
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/20140404040202/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/12480
Jeff,
There's a rather long history of people borrowing Peirce's terminology while leaving his definitions
and methods behind. I see that fine old tradition has now been extended to category theory, graph
theory, and who knows what else.
The full title of Peirce's 1870 Logic of relatives is
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 10.6
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/16/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-10-6/
Posted : April 16, 2014 at 3:30 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
As Peirce observes, it is not possible to work with relations in general
Subscribers may wish to note that there's a Subscriber Options mepage at the
Sympa Web Interface where one has, among other options, the ability to set a
Receiving Mode of No Mail (Useful for Vacations):
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/suboptions/peirce-l
Regards,
Jon
o~o~o~o~o~o
Where number is irrelevant, regimented mathematical technique has hitherto tended to be lacking.
Thus it is that the progress of natural science has depended so largely upon the discernment of
measurable quantity of one sort or another.
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 10.7
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/18/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-10-7/
Posted : April 18, 2014 at 6:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Here is what I get when I analyze Peirce's “giver of a horse to a lover
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 10.9
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/23/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%E2%80%A2-comment-10-9/
Posted : April 23, 2014 at 9:30 am
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
The use of the concepts of identity and teridentity is not to identify
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 10.10
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/24/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%E2%80%A2-comment-10-10/
Posted : April 24, 2014 at 12:00 am
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
The last of the three examples involving the composition of triadic
Gary,
Congratulations to you and Cathy on this work❢
Regards,
Jon
-
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on Reply List or Reply All to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 10.12
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/26/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-10-12/
Posted : April 26, 2014 at 9:30 am
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
I think I finally got clear about this ...
Potential ambiguities
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Selection 11
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/29/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-selection-11/
Posted : April 29, 2014 at 12:30 am
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Among other things, we may note in this section the
roots of a connection
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.1
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/29/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-1/
Posted : April 29, 2014 at 12:12 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
We have reached a suitable place to pause in our reading of Peirce’s text
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.2
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/30/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-2/
Posted : April 30, 2014 at 12:30 am
Author : Jon Awbrey
NOF Said …
==
Let's bring together the various things that Peirce has said
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.3
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/04/30/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-3/
Posted : April 30, 2014 at 3:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Before I can discuss Peirce’s “number of” function in greater detail I
Esteban,
Thanks for the links, I will add them to the pile of fusionable materials.
And welcome to the List!
Jon
Esteban Fredin wrote:
Dear list,
This is the very first time I post here. I'm a student of Cognitive
Semiotics at Aarhus University. When it comes to Category Theory,
I have
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.5
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/02/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-5/
Posted : May 2, 2014 at 5:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Everyone knows that the right sort of diagram can be a great aid in rendering
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.6
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/04/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-6/
Posted : May 4, 2014 at 2:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Let’s continue working our way through the above definitions,
constructing
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.7
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/05/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-7/
Posted : May 5, 2014 at 6:30 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
We come now to the very special cases of dyadic relations known
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.8
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/06/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-8/
Posted : May 6, 2014 at 12:34 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Let's take a closer look at the ''numerical incidence properties
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.10
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/07/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-10/
Posted : May 7, 2014 at 10:36 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
In the case of a dyadic relation F ⊆ X × Y that has the qualifications
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.16
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/21/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-16/
Posted : May 21, 2014 at 4:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
We have enough material on morphisms now to go back and cast a more
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.20
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/06/01/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%E2%80%A2-comment-11-20/
Posted : Jun 1, 2014 at 12:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
We come to the last of Peirce's statements about the “number of” function
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.23
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/06/05/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-23/
Posted : June 5, 2014 at 10:48 am
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Peirce's description of logical conjunction and conditional probability
LOR Comment 11.12
JA:http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/12/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%E2%80%A2-comment-11-12/
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/20140512190003/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/12829
LOR Comment 11.12
JA:http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/05/12/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%E2%80%A2-comment-11-12/
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/20140512190003/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/12829
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 11.24
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/06/08/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-11-24/
Posted : June 8, 2014 at 11:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
We come to the end of the “number of” examples that we noted
good grief, what tripe ...
-
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on Reply List or Reply All to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line
Yes, thankfully few of them saved me from total despair.
Jon
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com
On Jun 9, 2014, at 1:05 AM, Phyllis Chiasson ath...@olympus.net wrote:
Did you read the comments following the piece?
Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net wrote:
good grief, what tripe
If we must re-import our pragmatism from overseas these days, I think that
Finland might supply a higher quality re-cycling, at least a far as Dewey-eyed
education goes.
cf.
http://dianeravitch.net/2014/06/09/pasi-sahlberg-speaks-in-massachusetts-on-finnish-lessons/
Regards,
Jon
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 12.3
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/06/12/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-12-3/
Posted : June 12, 2014 at 4:32 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
We now have two ways of computing a logical involution that raises a dyadic
Post : Peirce's 1870 “Logic Of Relatives” • Comment 12.4
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/06/14/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-%e2%80%a2-comment-12-4/
Posted : June 14, 2014 at 12:00 am
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Peirce next considers a pair of compound involutions,
stating an equation
And then there's this —
☯ http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap140615.html
Jon
-
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on Reply List or Reply All to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L
Matt, List,
I was minded more of Plato's demiurge
than James' will to believe, a notion
on which Peirce looked rather askance,
if I recall correctly ...
Jon
Matt Faunce wrote:
Here is William James in his lecture Is Life Worth Living? on the urge y'all are speaking of.
Is it not sheer
the ideal Forms and the
metaphysical Master Craftsman.
Edwina
- Original Message - From: Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net
To: Matt Faunce mattfau...@gmail.com
Cc: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 5:16 PM
Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Re: De Waal Seminar Chapter 9 : Section on God
, point me toward Peirce's thoughts on James's Will to
Believe, or any of his concepts that are contrary to it?
Matt
On Jun 23, 2014, at 5:16 PM, Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net wrote:
Matt, List,
I was minded more of Plato's demiurge
than James' will to believe, a notion
on which Peirce looked rather
Stephen, Gary, List,
These would be the passages that always come most readily to my mind in this
connection:
Definition Of Logic
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2012/06/01/c-s-peirce-%E2%80%A2-on-the-definition-of-logic/
Logic As Semiotic
Peircers,
Just a note to anchor a series of recurring thoughts that come to mind incidental to the thread on
entropy, etc., but I won't have to much to say on the bio-chemico-physico-thermo-dynamic side of
thins, so I'll spin this off on under a separate heading. My interest in this topic
Thread:
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/20140630184801/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13445
Peircers,
Correcting a few typos and continuing ...
Just a note to anchor a series of recurring thoughts that come to mind incidental to the thread on
entropy, etc., but I
Thread:
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/2014063022/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13446
SR:http://web.archive.org/web/20140701002000/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13447
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/2014063022/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13446
SR:http://web.archive.org/web/20140701002000/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13447
Post : Doubt, Uncertainty, Dispersion, Entropy : 1
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/07/01/doubt-uncertainty-dispersion-entropy-1/
Posted : July 1, 2014 at 10:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Tags : Dispersion, Doubt, Entropy, Information, Information Theory,
Inquiry, Inquiry Driven
, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net wrote:
Thread:
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/20140630184801/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13445
Peircers,
Correcting a few typos and continuing ...
Just a note to anchor a series of recurring thoughts that come
Thread:
JA:http://web.archive.org/web/2014063022/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13446
SR:http://web.archive.org/web/20140701002000/http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13447
Post : ¿Shifting Paradigms? • 3
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/08/22/shifting-paradigms-%e2%80%a2-3/
Posted : August 22, 2014 at 12:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
A few thoughts on mathematical inquiry
that arose in connection with a number
of perennial issues ...
Re: Harvey
Post : C.S. Peirce • Syllabus • Selection 1
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/08/24/c-s-peirce-%e2%80%a2-syllabus-%e2%80%a2-selection-1/
Posted : August 24, 2014 at 11:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Returning to a text of Peirce that often comes to mind whenever I think
it is indeed one of the meanings of the ancient Greek word pragma.
Regards,
Jon
Jerry LR Chandler wrote:
JerryList, Jon:
Thanks for posting this quote.
On Aug 25, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net wrote:
An Outline Classification of the Sciences
180. This classification, which
natural inclination to examine its context.
At any rate, I would probably avoid using the word categories
for these classes of affairs as that word is confounded to much
already in recent discussions.
Regards,
Jon
Jon Awbrey wrote:
Jerry,
Thanks, you are very welcome.
I have to run right now
I was drawn
somewhat against my natural inclination to examine its context.
At any rate, I would probably avoid using the word categories
for these classes of affairs as that word is confounded too much
already in recent discussions.
Regards,
Jon
Jon Awbrey wrote:
Post : C.S. Peirce
Peircers,
There are a number of questions that come to mind as I return to the following
paragraph:
quote
180. This classification, which aims to base itself on the principal affinities of the objects
classified, is concerned not with all possible sciences, nor with so many branches of
Peircers,
I'm about to be busy with other busy-ness for a little while, so let me just copy here the other
selection from Peirce that I took as affording a ready plank in the bridge I was aiming to build
between older and newer notions of categories.
Selection 2
---
quote
I will
Re:Frederik Stjernfelt
At:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13825
Frederik,
One small point that I find myself making on a periodic basis: I think it is better to describe
Peirce's take on logic as non-psychologism rather than anti-psychologoism, the main thing being
A. Because people prefer falsity to truth, illusion to reality.
⁂
Being the drift of my reflections on the plays I saw at Stratford this summer —
King Lear, King John, Man of La Mancha, Alice Through the Looking-Glass,
Crazy for You, Hay Fever.
⁂
The Beaux’ Stratagem • Masks, Madness,
for invention, man must deal with truth and reality.
Or, the plane won't fly and the computer won't exist or work.
So, aren't we a combination of both? And thus, don't we require both?
Edwina
- Original Message - From: Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net
To: Peirce List 1 peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Re: Gary Fuhrman
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13838
I think your book will change all that, showing as it does a dicisign — that is, a sign complete
enough to be true — must involve both iconic and indexical components, but does not have to be
symbolic.
are not
mathematicians, then surely, there is some way to arrive at such an
understanding without also being a mathematician.
Edwina
- Original Message - From: Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net
To: Edwina Taborsky tabor...@primus.ca
Cc: Gary Fuhrman g...@gnusystems.ca; biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee;
Peirce List
Re: Tom Gollier
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13847
Tom,
It is probably best to leave this particular wrinkle alone for now, but maybe I can say a few things
by way of explaining my overall perspective on Peirce's logic and semiotics. My continuing interest
Re: John Deely
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13872
John,
My personal preference for that is objectivity, using the word in a telescopic sense that refers
to an objective lens, the one that points toward the object (pragma). I wrote about that here:
ideologies, eg, Buddhist, Christian retreat.
Edwina
- Original Message -
*From:* Gary Richmond gary.richm...@gmail.com
*To:* Edwina Taborsky tabor...@primus.ca
*Cc:* Jon Awbrey jawb...@att.net ; Peirce List 1
peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
*Sent:* Monday, September 01, 2014 6:57 PM
*Subject
in theorizing its continuity with reasoning.
gary f.
-Original Message-
From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:jawb...@att.net]
Sent: 3-Sep-14 9:18 AM
To: Gary Fuhrman
Cc: biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee; 'Peirce List'
Subject: Re: Natural Propositions
Gary,
This knee-jerk view of logic and thought
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13888
Re: it may be expressed as the claim that all true triadic relations are signs
vs. the claim that signs only comprise a subset of triadic relations.
Frederik All,
People may speculate until the
Peircers,
The following article provides an introduction to
polyadic or k-adic relations, at least so far as
the discrete case goes.
http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Relation_theory
Regards,
Jon
--
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog:
Peircers,
The following article introduces basic concepts relevant to
triadic relations, giving simple, concrete, but non-trivial
examples from mathematics and semiotics.
http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Triadic_relation
Regards,
Jon
--
academia:
Peircers,
The following article-in-progress sketches a view
of sign relations as sets of ordered triples each
having the form (object, sign, interpretant sign)
and develops the examples of sign relations given
in the article on triadic relations.
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13886
Frederik,
Yes, the orthogonality or independence of descriptive and normative sciences is noted by McCulloch
in his opening lines. The thing that struck me like a lightning synapse when I first read
No, it means that sometimes somebuddy's jes gotta go out and round up the cows
...
Head 'em up, Move 'em out, Rawhide ...
Jon
Gary Fuhrman wrote:
Does this mean the cows are home now?
No more, please!
gary f.
-Original Message-
From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:jawb...@att.net]
Sent: 4-Sep
Re: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Relation_theory
The article on k-adic relations deals with a higher level of generality than we usually need for
triadic relations and sign relations, but it does provide a theoretical context for discussing the
latter special cases and it
| The resultant metaphysical problem now is this:
| Does the man go round the squirrel or not?
— William James, ''Pragmatism''
☞http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Differential_Logic_and_Dynamic_Systems_2.0#Differential_Analysis_of_Propositions_and_Transformations
Speaking of hiking ...
/2014 kl. 16.10 skrev Jon Awbrey
jawb...@att.netmailto:jawb...@att.net:
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13886
Frederik,
Yes, the orthogonality or independence of descriptive and normative sciences is
noted by McCulloch in his opening lines
between logical consequence and temporal sequence … If the two were
identical, mental processes probably would be unable to address contents
different from
those processes … Best F
Den 04/09/2014 kl. 16.10 skrev Jon Awbrey
jawb...@att.netmailto:jawb...@att.net:
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt
Re: Howard Pattee
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13948
Peircers,
Let me just say I told you so and let Howard's remarks stand as an example of the kinds of futile
discussions I have known to arise in the past from using the word antipsychologism to describe
Peircers,
Since the subject keeps coming up, here is the first of the old posts
Google threw up when I did the search linked in my reply to FS below:
[Arisbe] Re: Critique of Short — News Flash — The N.O.N.-Psychological
Jon Awbrey jawbrey at att.net
Sat Jan 22 11:08:16 CST 2005
Previous
Re: Jeffrey Brian Downard
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13971
Jeff All,
With regard to non-psychologism, it was a slip on my part to use that term. I don't think I've
ever used it before. At any rate I will try to avoid using it again. It may sound like a
Thread Patch:
FS:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13825
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13826
JBD:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13971
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13974
Peircers,
neighbors, nor would it serve us well even if we succeed.
Jon Awbrey
October 16, 2000
http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Poems_Of_Emediate_Moment
--
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13977
Frederik,
In the 70s I read as almost as much Frege and Russell as I did Peirce and I think I grasped Frege's
attitude fairly well, along with the mess Russell made of just about everything he touched.
protested the very idea of interpreting his
position as a
refusal to regard logic as a branch of psychology. Can you produce any evidence
to back that up?
gary f.
-Original Message- From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:jawb...@att.net] Sent:
8-Sep-14 11:05 AM
Re: Frederik Stjernfelt At:
http
/pragmatic-maxim/
Regards,
Jon
Jon Awbrey wrote:
Gary, List,
With regards to the following line of mine:
| It has to do with projecting any Weltanschauung or ism on a thinker
| who protested the very idea of interpreting his position in that way.
I see that it is possible to parse that sentence
Dear Frederik,
I am more than gratified to find that you are beginning to appreciate the
felicities of the adjective form “non-psychological” in pointing to a higher
level of abstraction, or as I have often expressed it, the use of “non” as a
generalizing functor.
Regards,
Jon
Peircers,
I will have to be out of the loop for some days,
but this post will give me a peg on which I can
hang a few thoughts via mobile device that have
been tugging at the edge of my mind for a while.
Regards,
Jon
--
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog:
Thread:
StJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14024
SCR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14025
StJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14026
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14027
),
| Topobiology : An Introduction to Molecular Embryology,
| Basic Books, New York, NY.
Regards,
Jon
Jon Awbrey wrote:
Stephens, Howard, All,
The literatures that have been brought to bear and might be brought to
bear on this area are indeed deep in their historical roots and richly
ramified
Peircers,
I am still a bit loopy from jumping through a triple of orthogonal loops and
it's taking me longer to get back in the saddle than I thought it might, so let
me just paste in passel of links to a collection of background materials I've
referenced before, a lot of it
dictates.
Best F
Den 13/09/2014 kl. 05.41 skrev Jon Awbrey
jawb...@att.netmailto:jawb...@att.net :
Peircers,
From time to time I come to the realization that there are ways of reading
Peirce that make no sense to me. When I stop to think about the potential
sources of that evident divergence
| If mind is grounded in triadic relations
| and reality is grounded in triadic relations
| then what remains is to study the ways that
| more mindful materials and less mindful materials
| differ within the variety of triadic relations.
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.inquiry/3979
The cardin o't, the spinnin o't, The warpin o't, the winnin o't❢ ☞
FS:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13888
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13890
CG:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13998
wrote on hypostatic abstraction may go toward explaining
what I mean by relativizing the roles of subject and predicate.
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2008/08/08/hypostatic-abstraction/
Regards,
Jon
Frederik Stjernfelt wrote:
Dear Jon, lists - Den 15/09/2014 kl. 05.06 skrev Jon Awbrey
jawb
Re: Gary Richmond
At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14086
Gary,
A teridentity relation is the triadic extension of a simple identity relation.
For example, suppose our object domain is the set O = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4}.
The identity relation on O is the following set of
Thread:
GR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14086
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14122
GR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14123
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14124
Gary All,
The
Thread:
GR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14086
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14122
GR:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14123
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14124
Thread:
GR: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14086
JA: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14122
GR: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14123
JA: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14124
JA:
1 - 100 of 1051 matches
Mail list logo
