Hi Edwina: The breadth of well - differentiated modal logics is huge. So, I fully concur with your opening assertion.
That being said, I would make a simple observation that you may concur with, but may not have given it substantive weight. The methodology of sciences of chemistry and molecular biology have developed within a quantitative framework that is radically differentiated from the methodologies related to physics and engineering. This is related to the first four of Aristotle’s categories. Substance. Quantity. Quality. Relative. Following Mendeleev’s listing of seven categories of relatives, CSP recognized the algebraic closure on chemical experimentation and hence the logics of substances, independent of the forms of modal logics subsequently formalized by such writers as Quine and Kripke. Given the vast richness of “complex systems”, such as natural ecologies emerging from inorganic substances, does it surprise you that a special form of composition of relatives was constructed from the atomic numbers? Have fun! Cheers Jerry Footnote: Given the ongoing exchanges here in recent weeks, I would add a personal comment. After I recognized (in my graduate school years) that the chemical sciences were purely local (in the laboratory where are the Thermodynamic parameters were measurable) I further recognized that there was no need to mix my scientific knowledge with my theology! That is one of the important differentiations between chemical metrology and physical philosophy. > On Oct 27, 2024, at 7:13 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Jerry - > > My view is that one can come to different conclusions using modal logic. > > 1] For example, the Anselm-Hartshorne argument for god is: > ’There’s a necessary being is logically possible [ with logically possible as > the predicate or description of the necessary being] ] > Therefore, there’s a necessary being’. [because it’s possible is a > description of its nature]. > > But - we could also easily conclude: therefore, ’there’s no necessary being > is also logically possible’. > > Or - ’There’s a necessary being is logically necessary > 2] …but- this doesn’t make this necessary being to be ‘god’. It could be a … > > Because one asserts > 3] ‘ God is a necessary being’ - one can conclude that therefore, God is > actual. ' > But the problem with this is that a logical argument, whether possible or > necessary, doesn’t prove that something is actual or existential . That is > - the question has to be on whether the ’necessary’ also implies’ the > actual’. [ Anselm’s ontological says that the two are merged; others disagree > - ie they reject that ’the existence of an idea moves into the actual > existence of a ’thing’. > > Necessity and possibility arguments are complex! > > > > Edwina > >> On Oct 27, 2024, at 6:03 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Jerry, List: >> >> I explained the quoted statement in the remainder of the same paragraph. >> >> JAS: In logic, possibility and necessity are not predicates any more than >> existence/actuality. Instead, they are modalities, which is why axioms must >> be added to classical logic to incorporate them, one of which is called >> T--if a proposition is necessarily true, then it is actually true. In the >> Gamma part of Existential Graphs, anything within a solid cut within a >> broken cut is asserted to be possibly true, while anything within a broken >> cut within a solid cut is asserted to be necessarily true. However, when >> Peirce ultimately abandoned cuts altogether in favor of shading, he needed a >> new notation for such graphs--"I shall now have to add a Delta part in order >> to deal with modals" (R 500:3, 1911). Unfortunately, he never spelled out >> what he had in mind, but my newly published paper describes a plausible >> candidate (https://doi.org/10.2979/csp.00026). >> >> Regards, >> >> Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA >> Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian >> www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt >> <http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt> >> On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 2:17 PM Jerry LR Chandler >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> List, Jon: >>>> On Oct 26, 2024, at 7:17 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> In logic, possibility and necessity are not predicates any more than >>>> existence/actuality. >>> >>> ??? >>> Why? >>> What forms of logic are you referring to? >>> Which grammar of which logic informs your assertion? >>> How is it plausible that this assertion is meaningful? >>> >>> [This statement directly contradicts chemical, biochemical and biological >>> equilibrium processes as was well described by A. N. Whitehead.] >>> >>> Cheers >>> Jerry >> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ >> ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at >> https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at >> https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the >> links! >> ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON >> PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to >> [email protected] . >> ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] >> 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. > > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at > https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at > https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the > links! > ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON > PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] > . > ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] > 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.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links! ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] 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.
