Hi Jon, List,
you said, that "these six sentences express one and the same indivisible phenomenon.". That is right, the core phenomenon is the same. With "core phenomenon" I mean the observed event. But the difference is made by the observers, of which there are two: First the overall observer, who is the same one in all cases: You or me. Second, the intermediate observer, with whom the overall observer is identifying him/herself with: This one is changing, he is always the firstly mentioned: A,A,B,C,C,B. Now the difference eg. between the first and the second statement is, that the intermediate observer (in both cases "A") is identifying him(her)self with "C" in the first sentence, and with "B" in the second. In the fourth statement "C" is identifying with "A", and in the fifth with "B". Well, somehow. Maybe "identifying" is not a proper term, because it is too digital. Maybe it would be better to say, where is an emotional connection, or, whom does the intermediate observer regard for the main cause for his/her benefit, or to whom does she/he suppose more responsibility, or more ability, autonomy, reason. So, there are six sentences, that all have different subtle meanings, though they are telling the same event. All this I find not easy to grasp. Linguistics, semiotics.
Best,
Helmut
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 04. Februar 2015 um 19:45 Uhr
Von: "Jon Awbrey" <jawb...@att.net>
An: "Peirce List" <peirce-l@list.iupui.edu>
Betreff: [PEIRCE-L] Six Ways Of Looking At A Triadic Relation ⌬ 1
Von: "Jon Awbrey" <jawb...@att.net>
An: "Peirce List" <peirce-l@list.iupui.edu>
Betreff: [PEIRCE-L] Six Ways Of Looking At A Triadic Relation ⌬ 1
Post : Six Ways Of Looking At A Triadic Relation ⌬ 1
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/04/six-ways-of-looking-at-a-triadic-relation-%e2%8c%ac-1/
Posted : February 4, 2015 at 1:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Here's a triadic factoid from the 1903 Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism
that raises a number of important questions for me. I isolated Peirce's
observation about the "ordinary logic of relations" from the context of his
remarks that follow, partly in order to render the puzzle more striking.
There's better copy on my blog, and I'll copy out more as I get time.
---
A triadic relation has 3! = 6 ''converses'', six grammatically and rhetorically different ways of representing what is
logically the same information. Peirce illustrates the situation as follows, with six variations on the theme of giving.
<blockquote>
So in a triadic fact, say, for example
A gives B to C
we make no distinction in the ordinary logic of relations between the ''subject nominative'', the ''direct object'', and
the ''indirect object''. We say that the proposition has three ''logical subjects''. We regard it as a mere affair of
English grammar that there are six ways of expressing this:
A gives B to C
A benefits C with B
B enriches C at expense of A
C receives B from A
C thanks A for B
B leaves A for C
These six sentences express one and the same indivisible phenomenon.
</blockquote>
References
* Peirce, C.S., “The Categories Defended”, Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism : Lecture 3 (MS 308, delivered on 9 April
1903). Published in Collected Papers (CP 5.66–81, 88–92, in part), Harvard Lectures (HL 167–188), Essential Peirce :
Volume 2 (EP 2, 160–178).
* Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols.
7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 5 : Pragmatism and
Pragmaticism, 1934. (Cited as CP).
* Peirce, C.S., Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking : The 1903 Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism,
Patricia Ann Turrisi (ed.), State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, 1997. (Cited as HL).
Peirce, C.S., The Essential Peirce : Selected Philosophical Writings, Volume 2 (1893–1913), Peirce Edition Project
(eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1998. (Cited as EP 2).
Add a comment to this post:
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/04/six-ways-of-looking-at-a-triadic-relation-%e2%8c%ac-1/#respond
---
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
-----------------------------
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 "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/04/six-ways-of-looking-at-a-triadic-relation-%e2%8c%ac-1/
Posted : February 4, 2015 at 1:00 pm
Author : Jon Awbrey
Peircers,
Here's a triadic factoid from the 1903 Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism
that raises a number of important questions for me. I isolated Peirce's
observation about the "ordinary logic of relations" from the context of his
remarks that follow, partly in order to render the puzzle more striking.
There's better copy on my blog, and I'll copy out more as I get time.
---
A triadic relation has 3! = 6 ''converses'', six grammatically and rhetorically different ways of representing what is
logically the same information. Peirce illustrates the situation as follows, with six variations on the theme of giving.
<blockquote>
So in a triadic fact, say, for example
A gives B to C
we make no distinction in the ordinary logic of relations between the ''subject nominative'', the ''direct object'', and
the ''indirect object''. We say that the proposition has three ''logical subjects''. We regard it as a mere affair of
English grammar that there are six ways of expressing this:
A gives B to C
A benefits C with B
B enriches C at expense of A
C receives B from A
C thanks A for B
B leaves A for C
These six sentences express one and the same indivisible phenomenon.
</blockquote>
References
* Peirce, C.S., “The Categories Defended”, Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism : Lecture 3 (MS 308, delivered on 9 April
1903). Published in Collected Papers (CP 5.66–81, 88–92, in part), Harvard Lectures (HL 167–188), Essential Peirce :
Volume 2 (EP 2, 160–178).
* Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols.
7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 5 : Pragmatism and
Pragmaticism, 1934. (Cited as CP).
* Peirce, C.S., Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking : The 1903 Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism,
Patricia Ann Turrisi (ed.), State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, 1997. (Cited as HL).
Peirce, C.S., The Essential Peirce : Selected Philosophical Writings, Volume 2 (1893–1913), Peirce Edition Project
(eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1998. (Cited as EP 2).
Add a comment to this post:
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/02/04/six-ways-of-looking-at-a-triadic-relation-%e2%8c%ac-1/#respond
---
academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
-----------------------------
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 "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
----------------------------- 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 "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
