Ben, List,

I believe that a weaker is required for an ordered triple. Any finite set can 
be ordered. The Axiom of Choice, which is controversial, implies that any set 
including infinite ones can be ordered. The order need not be anything like 
'more' or 'less' in any intuitive sense. For example in a function, like f=ma, 
<m,a> is an ordered pair, one from one domain and another from another domain 
such that their product is in another domain which is the range of the 
function. Obviously, under the Newtonian interpretation m and a are not either 
more or less than the other in any intuitive (or even nondegenerate) sense. I 
think that this is worth remembering when thinking of Peircean triads in 
particular. I would go further than saying that we should not think of object, 
sign and interpretant as "falling dominos", since I am not at all clear that 
there is a unique "order of semiotic determination". This follows from the way 
I understand irreducible triads as not fully computable, and hence inherently 
open-ended. 

Best,
John

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Udell [mailto:bud...@nyc.rr.com] 
Sent: January 28, 2015 7:07 PM
To: biosemiot...@lists.ut.ee; 'Peirce-L'
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Triadic Relations

Jeff, Jon, lists,

I think that all that is required for an ordered triple, or an ordering of any 
length, is a rough notion of 'more' or 'less', for example an ordering of 
personal preferences, and this is enough for theorems, for example 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theorem. 
Exact quantities are not required. In the case of object, sign, interpretant, 
insofar as the object determines the sign to determine the interpretant to be 
determined by the object as the sign is determined by the object, the order of 
semiotic determination is 'object, sign, interpretant', although object, sign, 
interpretant are not to be understood as acting like successive falling 
dominoes.

Best, Ben

On 1/27/2015 2:08 PM, Jeffrey Brian Downard wrote:

[....]
Here is the starting question:  Doesn't the notion of an ordered triple require 
that we already have things sorted out in such a way that we are able to 
ascribe quantitative values to each subject that is a correlate of the triadic 
relation?
[....]



-----------------------------
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 .




Reply via email to