I am finding what Mail.google does to messages so confusing that I am gong to try to simplify here.
EricS writes *My liking of the analogy of sample estimators and underlying values *Ii.e.values on which the estimations converge--NST*] **is that, if one felt that were a valid analogy to a specific aspects of Peirce’s truth-relative-to-states-of-knowledge concept, it would completely clear the fog of philosophical profundity from Peirce, and say that this idea, for a modern quantitative reader, is an everyday commonplace, and one that we can easily examine at all levels from our habits to our formalism, and study the structure of in cognition. * To which I can only respond: *Y E S !!!!* I did feel obligated to reframe the word "underlying" because it adds back a bit of the mystery that I am so glad to see expunged. Another way for thinking about Peirce is to say that cognition is a statistical project and statistics is all we got. Peirce is trying as hard as possible NOT to be profound. Nick
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
