Cf: Differential Propositional Calculus • Discussion 4
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2021/03/20/differential-propositional-calculus-discussion-4/

Re: Differential Propositional Calculus
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/02/16/differential-propositional-calculus-overview/
::: Discussion 3
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2021/03/15/differential-propositional-calculus-discussion-3/

Re: Peirce List
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2021-03/thrd1.html#00020
::: Helmut Raulien
https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2021-03/msg00095.html

<QUOTE HR:>

1. I think I like very much your Cactus Graphs.  Meaning that I
   am in the process of understanding them, and finding it much
   better not to have to draw circles, but lines.

2. Less easy for me is the differential calculus.
   Where is the consistency between (x,y) and (x, y, z)?
   (x, y) means that x and y are not equal and (x, y, z)
   means that one of them is false.
   Unequality and truth/falsity for me are two concepts
   so different I cannot think them together or see
   a consistency between them.

3. What about (w, x, y, z)?

4. Can you give a grammar, like, what does a comma mean,
   what do brackets mean, what does writing letters following
   each other with an empty space but no comma mean, and so on?

5. Same with Cactus Graphs, though I think, they might be
   self-explaining for me — everything is self-explaining,
   depending on intellectual capacity, but mine is limited.

</QUOTE>

Dear Helmut,

Many thanks for your detailed comments and questions.  They help me see
the places where more detailed explanations are needed.  I added numbers
to your points above for ease of reference and possible future reference
in case I can't get to them all in one pass.

Cactus Graphs
=============

I'm glad you found the cactus graphs to your liking.
It was a critical transition for me when I passed from
trees to cacti in my graphing and programming and it
came about by recursively applying a trick of thought
I learned from Peirce himself.  These days I call it a
“Meta-Peircean Move” to apply one of Peirce's heuristics
of choice or standard operating procedures to the state
resulting from previous applications.  All that makes for
a longer story I made a start at telling in the following
series of posts.

Animated Logical Graphs
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2019/05/28/animated-logical-graphs-14/

[Links omitted for this email.  See the blog post linked at the top for the 
list.]

https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2019/07/31/animated-logical-graphs-27/

Well, the clock in the hall struck time for lunch some time ago,
so I think I'll answer its call, break here, and continue later …

Regards,

Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► 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 no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of 
the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP;  moderated by Gary Richmond;  and 
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.

Reply via email to