Main Thread: JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15318 JW:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15331 JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15338 JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15356 JW:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15360 JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15370
Blog Workup: 1. http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/01/08/animated-logical-graphs-1/ 2. http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/01/14/animated-logical-graphs-2/ Jim, List, Part of what prompted me to post this material on Animated Logical Graphs was of course our current discussion of diagrammatic reasoning, iconicity, and Peirce's existential graphs. It's fair to say that the better part of my life of inquiry and my life in general has been spent in active work on these topics, in many respects going back before I even met up with Peirce. In my experience many of the regards that puzzle our will at the latter letters of Peirce's logical alphabet can been addressed and cleared up to a large degree by starting with Alpha Logic and all the concrete and simple examples it affords. That was my hope, and I still hope it, no matter how ironic that may appear in view of all that transpired almost immediately on opening up this topic. But hey, I'm nothing if not Peirce-istent ... Jon On 1/14/2015 10:49 AM, Jim Willgoose wrote: > Jon, > > I enjoy the logical graphs and the history behind them. I miss Irving Anellis and his knowledge of the history of > logic. I came across Spencer Brown again recently while looking at Huntington's axioms and other attempts to state > very basic conditions for algebra. i am especially curious about the need for stating closure, stating that "there > must be at least two distinct elements," Post categories, and the notions of generation and introduction. I love the > idea that two universes are "together-with" each other before they Meet. (on the Sheet) I have wondered if this "may > be" a reason for abandoning entitative graphs. (Why have one sheet rather than a pile? What would be off the sheet? > etc.) > > Jim W > >> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:45:51 -0500 From: jawb...@att.net To: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Re: >> Animated Logical Graphs >> >> Jim, List, >> >> It's almost 50 now years since I first encountered the volumes of Peirce's ''Collected Papers'' in the math library >> at Michigan State, and shortly afterwards a friend called my attention to the entry for Spencer Brown's ''Laws of >> Form'' in the Whole Earth Catalog and I sent off for it right away. I would spend the next decade just beginning >> to figure out what either one of them was talking about in the matter of logical graphs and I would spend another >> decade after that developing a program, first in Lisp and then in Pascal, that turned graph-theoretic data >> structures formed on their ideas to good purpose as the basis of its reasoning engine. I thought it might >> contribute to a number of long-running and ongoing discussions if I could articulate what I think I learned from >> that experience. >> >> So I'll try to keep focused on that. >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon >> >> On 1/12/2015 3:50 PM, Jon Awbrey wrote: >>> Thread: JA:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15318 >>> JW:http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/15331 >>> >>> Jim, >>> >>> I'm in the middle of breaking in a new computer -- or a new computer is in the middle of breaking in me -- so my >>> exo-brain will be a bit scattered for a while. It may help me to write this up on my blog where the medium both >>> forces and helps me to be more coherent. >>> >>> Blog version of initial post plus a few extra links: >>> >>> ☞ http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/01/08/animated-logical-graphs-1/ >>> >>> Back later ... >>> >>> Jon >>> >>> Jim Willgoose wrote: >>>> Interesting stuff. There is some debate about what exactly you are showing. I take it to be the use of Brown's >>>> Laws of Form represented by edges and nodes. One of the links exhibits the generation and resolution of >>>> branches and roots as you might get in a logic check. The addition of cuts and nests I suppose is an analogy >>>> with Peirce. There are any number of ways to look at it semiotically. (Basically, the graphs interpret the >>>> laws. The relation is primarily symbolical) >>>> >>>> Jim W >>> >> -- 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 .
