> On Mar 16, 2017, at 7:48 AM, John F Sowa <s...@bestweb.net > <mailto:s...@bestweb.net>> wrote: > > To formalize the idea of convergence, I combined a Lindenbaum > lattice with methods of belief (or theory) revision. The lattice > contains all possible theories expressible within a given logic, > and the AGM operators for belief revision give a measure of how > close one theory is to another. > > I discuss this measure and relate it to Peirce and some critics > (including Quine) in the signproc.pdf article. (Excerpt below)
I’ve not read that yet John (hope to at lunch). But a quick thought. It seems to me Peirce isn’t committed to the view of convergence in the scientific realism of that era. The idea we’re getting closer and closer to the truth. Rather it would seem Peirce’s commitments entail that we might get close and then far so long as at infinity it reaches the truth. That means that as useful as short term notions of convergence are, they really don’t guarantee much. The way I usually think about it is that there are many continuous equations such that the limit as x → ∞ y → 0.
----------------------------- 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 .
