Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Sungchul Ji
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

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Jon Awbrey
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

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Sungchul Ji
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

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Jon Awbrey
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

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Frederik Stjernfelt
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

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Frederik Stjernfelt
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

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Sungchul Ji
(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,

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-21 Thread Jon Awbrey
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

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-20 Thread Jon Awbrey
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

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Icons Indices

2014-09-20 Thread Jon Awbrey
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