Jerry,
I've been tied up with some critical deadlines, which require me
to curtail my email activities. I'll reply to your comments next
week. But I just wanted to mention an article in which I discuss
issues related to the following exchange:
Wittgenstein's language games represent the essence of Science
and engineering, and they're highly compatible with Peirce:
Your assertions are remote from my reading the nature of local
and global relationships in number, time and space inferred from
Wittgenstein writings and from CSP writings. Just my interpretations,
that’s all.
See: Language Games, A Foundation for Semantics and Ontology
http://jfsowa.com/pubs/lgsema.pdf
That article appeared in _Game Theory and Linguistic Meaning_,
edited by Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen, Elsevier, 2007, pp. 17-37.
In it, I discuss issues about the full range of languages and
logics. I even cited Dan Everett's studies of Pirahã. See
the paragraph below.
John
___________________________________________________________________
As this summary shows, natural languages can express complex logic, but
it does not imply that complex logic is a prerequisite for language.
Infants successfully use language to satisfy their needs as soon as they
begin to utter single words and short phrases. Preschool children learn
and use complex language long before they learn any kind of mathematics
or formal logic. Although all known natural languages have complex
syntax, some rare languages, such as Pirahã (Everett 2005), seem to lack
the levels of nesting needed to express full FOL. Everett noted that the
Pirahã people have no word for all or every or even a logically
equivalent paraphrase. That limitation would make it hard for them to
invent mathematics and formal logic.
-----------------------------
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 .
