John, List, All: None of this is new information, and the following statement is still false.
JFS: In that note, I showed that any logical or philosophical idea expressed in or explained by any EGs prior to June 1911 could be expressed or explained as well or better by the EGs of R670 and L231. The logical and philosophical idea that negation is not a primitive relation, but instead is derived from the implication of falsity, is expressed in and explained by the EGs prior to June 1911 (on multiple occasions) and *cannot *be expressed in nor explained by the EGs of R 670 and RL 231. JFS: Since Peirce's version of 1913 is identical to the 1911 EGs, the more complete specification of L231 would be his best and final version. This is a subjective opinion, since Peirce himself never states or implies that his explanation of EGs in RL 231 is "his best and final version," and "nobody can claim that anything other than an exact quotation is what Peirce intended." Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:46 PM John F. Sowa <s...@bestweb.net> wrote: > On 8 November 1913, Peirce described a version of EGs that is identical to > the 1911 version. See the copy below. My summary: > > A universe of discourse is described by the graphs scribed on a sheet of > assertion (AKA phemic sheet). The structure and meaning of an EG is > determined by five conventions [plus a default convention 0]: > > 0. Conjunction (AND) is the implicit logical operator that relates the > graphs scribed in any area. > > 1. The existential quantifier (there exists something) is represented by a > heavy dot. > > 2. A heavy dot extended to a heavy line asserts the identity of the > objects denoted at each end. > > 3. A bifurcation of a line (a ligature) to form a teridentity asserts the > co-identity of the objects denoted at the three ends. > > 4. Shading an area negates whatever is scribed in that area. > > 5. Evaluation of a nest of negations proceeds from the outside-in > (endoporeutic). This implies that a nest of two negations, such as "not-(A > not-B)", is equivalent to a conditional "if A then B". > > This confirms my reply to Francesco on June 10. In that note, I showed > that any logical or philosophical idea expressed in or explained by any EGs > prior to June 1911 could be expressed or explained as well or better by the > EGs of R670 and L231. Since Peirce's version of 1913 is identical to the > 1911 EGs, the more complete specification of L231 would be his best and > final version. > > John > > ------------------------- > > Peirce described a version of EGs in the excerpt dated 8 November 1913 of > "Letters to F. A. Woods" (L477, July 1911 to December 1913): > > Of course, not only are two terms often connected by a bond of relational > identity as in "son's wife" (represented by the graph (Fig...) and in > "wife's son" (Fig...) but also every term is bound to the real universe, > though in my graphs this is only represented by the term's being scribed on > the sheet, which denotes the universe. Then only about four conventions > more complete the definition of the method of representation. These are: > > First, that a heavy dot stands for something or a real object. > > Second, dot prolonged into a heavy line asserts the identity of the > objects denoted by its extremities. > > Third, a node of point of bifurcation of such a line asserts the > co-identity of the three ends; and co-identity is the more usual meaning of > the word 'and'. (Fig...) > > Fourth, shading an area of the phemic sheet denies whatever is scribed on > that area. > > Fifth, the interpretation proceeds endogenously [endoporeutic]. That is, > Fig... means "It is false that A is false while B is true", i.e. "If A is > true so is B" and the interpretation is not B is true and A is false which > would be an exogenous interpretation, i.e. beginning in the inside and > proceeding outward. >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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 UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the body. More at https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
