John,
During your repeated debates with Jon an experience I had as a freshman
philosophy kept knocking at my doors of perception. It was the first meeting in
which each of the students had to read a passage of Hegels logic. I was the
first to read and started with the first alinea in which logi
All,
I think, the difference is not the meaning, but what it is. Though the double negation´s meaning is the same as the conclusion´s meaning, the double negation has the form of a proposition, or a definition, which is secondness: "There is not a featherless biped that is not a human" may
Helmut - if you read Peirce's cosmological outlines [6.203 and
1.412], he begins with 1ns, moves on to the instantiations of 2ns,
and then, into the developing habits of 3ns. So, the 'actualization'
of the modes in spatiotemporal existence is linear.
But - all three modes are p
Edwina,
yes, "a human is a featherless biped" might be understood as singular description. I meant it as definition, so it is better to say "a human is defined as featherless biped", which is a proposition, a description of a status, and not yet a law. The semiosis of habit-formation goes 1-2-
Cf: Survey of Animated Logical Graphs • 3
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/08/23/survey-of-animated-logical-graphs-3/
All,
I updated my last Survey page on Animated Logical Graphs
and added links to the series of posts on CSP, GSB, & Me.
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2017/07/19/charles-sand
Auke,
I agree with your observation, and the conclusion: "It
is a line of thought I can see leading to what Jon
wrote."
Charles' father Benjamin Peirce gave him a thorough
training in mathematics from early childhood, and Charles devoured
Whateley's logic book in a week when he was 13. He insi
John Sowa wrote:
JFS: Jon's method of focusing on the words is a kind of literary criticism
that would be more appropriate for analyzing Shakespeare than Peirce.
I found this comment as useless and, frankly, as absurd as this earlier one
of yours in this thread.
JFS: As for Jon's comments abou
Gary R,
My remarks were ad rem, not ad hominem. Mathematics is
like music. A mathematician or a musician thinks only in terms of the
patterns, the operations on those patterns, and their relationship to
whatever notation is used to represent them.
The words used to
describe those patterns a
