Jon,
I like your diagram, Figure 1, which differs somewhat from mine, Figure 2.
As you can see both these diagrams are 4-node networks. One of the
differences between Figures 1 and 2, however, is that S is located at the
periphery in the former while it is at the hub in the latter. This
Thread:
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14182
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14184
SJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14187
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14194
Jon wrote:
For another thing, the technical use of the tern (092114-1)
network tends to lead techies and others to read
the line between O and R as referring to a dyadic
relation, and similarly for the other two lines,
and to think that the triadic relation denoted by
R is somehow
Thread:
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14182
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14184
SJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14187
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14194
Dear Jon, lists,
I think Jon has an important point here.
Too many people confuse the idea that diagrams are iconic, on the one hand,
with the idea that iconic signs should be immediately interpretable, on the
other.
It is the latter which is false. Most if not all diagrams require symbolic
Dear Jon, lists
This is indeed a problem.
So much literature appears now - partially due to bibliometric imperatives
like publish or perish - that many papers are now never really read by anyone
but editors and peer reviews - among them undoubtedly many good or even great
papers. So those
(For undistorted Table 1, see the attached.)
Jon,
It seems to me that many confusions in semiotic discussions arise because
the two kinds of signs that Peirce defined are often conflated. Peirce
defined two kinds of signs --
(i) 9 TYPES OF signs (qualisign, icon, rheme, sinsign, index,
Thread:
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14182
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14184
SJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14187
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14194
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14182
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14184
SJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14187
Sung, List,
Let's see if we can turn our discussion of these paltry stick figures to some
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14182
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14184
SJ:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14187
JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/14194
Sung, List,
Consider
10 matches
Mail list logo