Re: [PEIRCE-L] Synechism and Peirce's Categories typo correction

Typo correction: ‘Synergism' should read ’synechism' > On May 8, 2024, at 2:41 PM, Jerry LR Chandler > wrote: > > Jon: > >> On May 7, 2024, at 5:24 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt >> wrote: >> >> What additional insights can we gain from furthe

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Synechism and Peirce's Categories

Jon: > On May 7, 2024, at 5:24 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote: > > What additional insights can we gain from further contemplating continuity in > light of the categories, and the categories in light of continuity? > Material reality of the chemical sciences is based on the uniqueness of every

Re: [PEIRCE-L] How do we formalize the triadic sign?

Robert; List- > On Jan 8, 2024, at 9:18 AM, robert marty wrote: > > You know very well that we don't mention "what goes without saying" in > mathematics. For example, when Peirce names the classes of signs, he doesn't > note that symbols are legisigns, any more than he mentions that the three

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Classifying Signs (was Mark Token Type)

List, Jon: > On Apr 16, 2024, at 1:10 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > HR: But all this doesn´t mean, that between parallel classes (such as icon, > index, symbol) there is a gradient instead of a sharp distinction. > > According to Peirce, one sign can be more or less iconic, indexical, or

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Delta Existential Graphs (was The Proper Way in Logic)

Jon: On review, this comment is of possible interest to a purist! > On Feb 27, 2024, at 12:26 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > JAS: Every explicitly scribed EG is a replica (instance), a sinsign (token) > of a peculiar kind that embodies a legisign (type). > > JLRC: Frankly, I fail to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Zoom lecture on the CSP's role in philosophy of science (U Pitt)

Dear Edwinia, List > On Apr 7, 2024, at 1:09 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > And I also am a strong supporter of Peirce’s three categories, with the > interplay between Firstnerss [ randomnness, chance, freedom]; steady-state > interaction [Secondness] and the development of new habits of

[PEIRCE-L] Zoom lecture on the CSP's role in philosophy of science (U Pitt)

FYI JLRC Friday, April 12th @ 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm EDT This talk will also be available live streamed on: Zoom at https://pitt.zoom.us/j/94576817686 Title: Peirce Disappears: C.S. Peirce and Early Logical Empiricism Abstract: Scholars of the history of philosophy of science read and hear a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Meta-languages. Re: Four branches of existential graphs: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta

arily as deductive conclusions (consequent). For example, if the EGs > for Euclid's five postulates are scribed in the margin, then they can be > iterated to the interior, where the EGs for all the theorems of Euclidean > geometry can be derived from them in accordance with the usual permi

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Four branches of existential graphs: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta

List, John: > On Mar 20, 2024, at 3:16 PM, John F Sowa wrote: > > That quotation shows that Gamma graphs add one and only one NECESSARY feature > to Alpha + Beta graphs: the same or equivalent metalanguage feature used in > 1898 (RLT). When Peirce referred to the DIVISION of Gamma graphs,

[PEIRCE-L] Meta-languages. Re: Four branches of existential graphs: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta

Jon, List > On Mar 20, 2024, at 12:46 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > Peirce's 1898 and 1903 notations for metalanguage are identical, except that > the oval and line are lightly drawn in the former and dotted in the latter. > > Peirce's "red pencil" notation in R 514 has nothing to do

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Logical Content of Graphical Signs (was Higher-Order Logics)

ing > states of things with propositions (dicisigns/phemes). > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchm

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Letter to Risteen (was Higher-Order Logics)

John: > On Mar 13, 2024, at 4:24 PM, Gary Richmond wrote: > > JFS: Once again, Peirce's logic is at the forefront of 21st C developments. While in one sense, I agree with your ascertain, but probably for different reasons. The question is, what aspects of “21st C developments” are you

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Higher-Order Logics (was Problems in mixing quantifiers with modal logic)

Jon, John, List: The attempts to interpret the on going discussions leads to simple questions about meaning of symbols and logics. Given a graphic object, how does one decipher the logical content of it? What types of semantics can be associated with what types of visual distinctions? How

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Delta Existential Graphs (was The Proper Way in Logic)

Jon, List > On Feb 23, 2024, at 5:22 PM, John F Sowa wrote: > > > JLRC> First, the question of modern modal symbolic logic is remote from > probability theory and even remoter from the Peircian notion of “qualisign, > sinsign, legisign” > > That is true of Peirce's modal logic of 1903,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Delta Existential Graphs (was The Proper Way in Logic)

Jon, John, List: Thanks to both of you for pushing the discourse toward the potential modern interpretations of CSP’s thoughts (semes?). I only have time for a couple of feedbacks, although your texts motivated deeper deliberations. 1. First, the question of modern modal symbolic logic is

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Interpretants, Sign Classification, and 3ns (was Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why)

List, Jon > On Feb 14, 2024, at 12:56 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > There are indeed six classes of signs according to their dyadic relations > with their two external interpretants (immediate is internal), but they have > nothing to do with "the six basic question words.” Thanks for

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Proper Way in Logic (was Peirce's Ongoing Semiotic Project)

List, Edwinia, Mike First, thanks to JAS for his well crafted initial post and an a direct inquiry to him if those are the only relevant citations to the intermingling of grammatical semantics with CSP’s notion of a copulant. I strongly suspect a deeper meaning is to be found in other

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

s’. > > And I don’t see what your reference to aphantasia means. > > Edwina > > > >> On Jan 18, 2024, at 10:49 PM, Jerry LR Chandler >> wrote: >> >> List: >> >>> On Jan 11, 2024, at 3:52 PM, Edwina Taborsky >&g

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

List: > On Jan 11, 2024, at 3:52 PM, Edwina Taborsky > wrote: > > Peirce’s outline of these forms of consciousness [7.551] of Feeling, > Altersense and Medisense’ or primisense, alter sense, medisense. And, just as > in his outline of the modal categories, these can be subdivided, so to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

t Philosopher, Lutheran Christian > > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt>www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > <http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 12:52 

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

Thanks for your answer. We seem to be on different wavelengths. > On Jan 11, 2024, at 12:24 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > We can substitute "headache," "orange," or any other common noun for "camel" > in this passage. It seems to me that there is a profound distinction between a

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

> On Jan 11, 2024, at 11:28 AM, Edwina Taborsky > wrote: > > But you already know this Edwinia: If I understood the meaning of the “triadic relations”, I would not waste my time attempting to frame precise questions and intensely analyzing the grammatical structures of your and other

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

, of course, that means that there is even no such thing as a singular triad. Everything is networking with other triads.EdwinaOn Jan 10, 2024, at 10:04 PM, Jerry LR Chandler wrote:List: Well, I will continue to search for an adequate semantic _expression_ for my feelings about the meanings (plural)

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

ve noted previously). >>> >>> When it comes to ordinal numbers, phaneroscopic analysis of the genuine >>> triadic relation of representing/mediating establishes that the sign is the >>> first (simplest) correlate, the object is the second (of mid

[PEIRCE-L] Categorizations of triadic Relationships (Was Re: Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce)

Following Robert’s efforts to clarify meanings of terminology in symbolic logics... > On Jan 8, 2024, at 9:45 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote: > > The directionality of semiosis is such that the object determines the sign > while being unaffected by that sign, and the sign determines the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] How do we formalize the triadic sign?

> On Jan 8, 2024, at 9:18 AM, robert marty wrote: > > Jerry, List > > You know very well that we don't mention "what goes without saying" in > mathematics. > Sorry, Robert. Interesting but hardly compelling response. Human communications in multidisciplinary forums such as this are open

Re: [PEIRCE-L] How do we formalize the triadic sign?

> On Jan 7, 2024, at 9:10 AM, robert marty wrote: > > It's clear, then, that the composition of the two determinations gives rise > to the triadic relation for Peirce. That's why I've underlined "therefore." > Consequently, the formalization is simplified considerably, without any loss > of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Representing sign relations in existential graphs

> On Jan 6, 2024, at 9:48 PM, John F Sowa wrote: > > Since nobody has found an EG drawn by Peirce to represent the sign relation, In the 1870’s or early eighties, CSP referred to the ammonia molecule as a symbol. More precisely, pictorially, he demonstrated the three bonds between the three

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Graphical Representations of the Sign by Peirce

List: It was amusing to read theses historic responses to an issue that faded away in most of the philosophical community and almost all the scientific community. Edwinia broaches on current (and meaningful) aspects of the stipulations of cognitive forms to objects of the external world.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] More about Dr. Karl Firston, Chief Scientist at Verses AI

John: Thanks for posting this. The online book is a long argument with an intent… This is a very aggressive “Start-up” with a powerful motive. It will be fun to watch the feathers fly as the fox invades the henhouse of “Big Tech”. Happy New Year to All and Everyone Else too! Cheers Jerry >

[PEIRCE-L] Synesthesia Was Re: interpretant and thirdness

ssive mutations such that revising even small fragments of CSP’s intended meanings by functor substitutions is a highly labor intensive challenge. The notion that one could “change” CSP’s usage for the convenience of economic incentives is a very low grade of “scholarship”. Cheers Jerry Jerry

Re: [PEIRCE-L] interpretant and thirdness

List: If I may add a realistic note to the discussion on changing terminology. My opinion come from three significant experiences with scientific notations. Before I offer my opinions I would note historically that CSP writings are flows of changing terminologies with rare examples of concerns

[PEIRCE-L] Role of Copula in the logic of Grammars. Re: Peirce and Knowledge Representation

Mike, List > On Dec 5, 2023, at 1:51 PM, Mike Bergman wrote: > >> >> In a slightly related issue, have you any comments on CSP’s papers on the >> role of the copula in representation theory? In other words, have you >> addressed the inferences between predicate logics and the grammar of >>

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce and Knowledge Representation

Hi Mike: Thank you very very much for posting the links to the sections of your book. I enjoyed the first sections and will explore it further as time permits. My initial comment is that Peirce’s linkable to natural philosophy are submerged. In a slightly related issue, have you any comments

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Conflict between deduction and discovery in mathematics

Matias, Jon: First, I am very curious, Matias, on where your critical question emerges from? What are the sources of your curiosity? The fuller the ascriptions of your cognitive status, the better I will be able to respond to this simple but daring question. Jon, in your numerous posts that

[PEIRCE-L] Formal ontologies from Rutherford and Schrödinger Re: Why vagueness is important

John: You write: > Your notes remind me of the importance of vagueness and the limitations of > precision in any field -- especially science, engineering, and formal > ontology. You may wish to consider the distinctions between the methodology of the chemical sciences from that of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Chat GPT and Peirce

List: Just a brief comment on Professor Everett wide-reaching scientific assertion that appears to me to subscribe too and pontificate about CSP writings with respect to realism of scientific phenomenology. > On Jul 18, 2023, at 1:44 PM, Thomas903 wrote: > > Dan, > > I wanted to comment

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Who was Cerberus?

John, List: > On Jan 22, 2023, at 10:41 PM, John F Sowa wrote: > > In a letter to Lady Welby on 25 December 1908? > "I define a Sign as anything which is so determined by something else, called > its Object, and so determines an effect upon a person, which effect I call > its Interpretant,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Who was Cerberus?

Hi John: A bit speculative but certainly not totally implausible. The tone of the message leaves little doubt about his level of frustration with his colleagues. By the way, the phrase: > that the latter is thereby mediately determined by the former. > Is a bit over stated. In order to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce Interprets Peirce

Robert, John, List: I would predict that this project will generate many many new insights into CSP nachlass. Robert’s concern is super important. In the past century, the re-symbolizations of mathematics and the natural sciences has emasculated Peircian meaning, especially in the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Phaneroscopic Analysis (was A key principle of normative semeiotic for interpreting texts)

heers Jerry > > 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 > <htt

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Phaneroscopic Analysis (was A key principle of normative semeiotic for interpreting texts)

List: > On Oct 25, 2021, at 10:14 AM, robert marty wrote: > (Cited as from MS0602_012) > ...there should be a nomological science , which shall make out all the > different indecomposable elements which enter into everything that is > conceivably possible, discriminates them with care, and

Re: [PEIRCE-L] [CYBCOM] Re: Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry

Jon: This post is so muddled that I gave up on a meaningful scientific interpretation of it. Cheers Jerry > On Oct 17, 2021, at 7:00 AM, Jon Awbrey wrote: > > Cf: Theme One Program • Motivation 1 > https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2018/05/15/theme-one-program-motivation-1/ > > All, > > The

[PEIRCE-L] Abracadabra (was Modeling Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics (part B1))

List: > On Oct 6, 2021, at 4:38 PM, Jon Awbrey wrote: > > I can't recall a single instance of anyone ever > changing their opinion about anything of any significance. Interesting view. I feel several regular contributors have substantially matured in the past 20 odd years that I have

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Abracadabra (was Modeling Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics (part B1))

Bernard: > On Aug 27, 2021, at 5:33 PM, Bernard Morand wrote: > > It is a good illustration of my feeling about the bad quality level of the > discussions on Peirce-l. My feelings are fully parallel with yours. Your articulative description of the styles of communication denotes the

[PEIRCE-L] Novel Resources for scholars with an interest in the perplexity of CSP's logical abduction

List: Two significant reference volumes have recently been received and I await a third. Two of these volumes significantly illuminate the putative illations between propositional logic and model theory. (I did not check if these books are on Ben’s list or not.) Truth and Assertibility, Nik

Re: [PEIRCE-L] [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Re: Cognitive Signs (was All Semiotic, No Puzzle)

Jerry R: I will just take a quick moment to respond to your posts. My simple conjecture is that these statements rest on the role of sin-sign in constructing and confirming new forms of knowledge. While a sinsign is singular, the index would ordinarily be plural as would the arguments that

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations

List: > On Sep 28, 2021, at 9:30 AM, Jon Awbrey wrote: > > The likeness theory of reference has the same problem as the > correspondence theory of truth, namely, as used in those theories > both terms refer to dyadic relations and dyadic relations are not > adequate to the task of accounting

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Off-List: Minimal Negation Operators

List: > On Sep 27, 2021, at 7:56 PM, Imran Makani wrote: > > But it remains unclear to me how you concluded that minimal negation > operators are not related to Peirce’s mathematical work. As a chemist, CSP often inscended hyle terminology into his logical corpse as he sought to extend the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Theism (was Inquiry Into Inquiry)

List: The meaning of the term “transcendence” was explored in considerable detail several years ago in order to grasp the bizarre writings of CSP on the meaning of chemical symbols as breadth and comprehension. Indeed, the originals of CSP’s father’s views were aligned with the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 46

ind? > > Thanks, > > 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/Jon

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 46

List, Edwina: The disconnect is not complete. The signs for firstness, secondness, etc are preserved. Was it Hegel who asserted: "Ignorance is not innocence.”? A new generation of CSP scholars emerging in Europe offers promise. Cheers Jerry > On Sep 14, 2021, at 8:08 AM, Edwina Taborsky

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The "generative potency" of the number three.

List, Gary: > On Sep 12, 2021, at 10:44 PM, sowa @bestweb.net wrote: > > GF: as I said in my post this morning, formal logic produces explicit > formulations (which may include “letters of the alphabet” as symbols of the > variables). But the phaneroscopist’s attention would be distracted

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The "generative potency" of the number three.

List, John: > On Sep 12, 2021, at 10:44 PM, sowa @bestweb.net wrote: > > That definition of formal logic from Baldwin's Dictionary is very close to > the definition by DeMorgan, who first introduced the term 'formal logic'. It > is true of all the algebraic notations for logic, including

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Pure math & phenomenology (was Slip & Slide

Edwinia, List: I concur with you assertion below, but this view in inadequate to separate the dramatic differences between CSP’s notion of logic from classic logic and more importantly, why he choose to follow a semiotic path to ground his logic rather than the classic path of antecedents to

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Pure math & phenomenology

List, Gary: Excellent post. Thank you! Below, I will postulate how Gary’s interpretation of this semantic distinction illates to syntactical distinctions of the natural philosophy of the natural sciences and natural diagrammatic mathematics resting on CSP’s notion of the symbolic

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne : Slip & Slide 34

Jon: I share your concerns. My thoughts are a bit sharper… Sadly, the consequences of this public discussion of these slides for the future of CSP studies in the USA is unknowable. Hopefully, our European colleagues will not abandon the inquiry. Cheers Jerry > On Aug 27, 2021, at 10:16 AM,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 31

List: > On Aug 24, 2021, at 11:39 AM, > > On the contrary, André is explicitly discussing phaneroscopy, not semeiotic. This sentence is a remarkable example of how emotional rhetorical thrusts generate the thoughts that make no sense in the language of CSP. Units of thoughts have units of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] possibility WAS Andre De Tienne: Slow Read slide 27

List: > On Aug 22, 2021, at 9:29 PM, John F. Sowa wrote: > > I suggested the word 'diagram', one of Peirce's favorite terms, which could > be used in discussions of the issues that were raised. The word diagram does > *not* mean 'qualitative possibility' (whatever that may mean). But that

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 27. Needed correction.

Edwina: > On Aug 18, 2021, at 12:27 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > I don't see Peircean Firstness as an ideal form, but as an open free > force-to-be-actualized .. Why? I concur that CSP’s notion of first-ness should not be transitioned into an ideal form such as an eager and

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

the department of pragmatism that Peirce > called critical common-sensism. > > Gary f. > > From: Jerry LR Chandler > Sent: 17-Aug-21 17:18 > To: Peirce List > Cc: Gary Fuhrman > Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's > Semiotics.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

List, Gary CSP professed to be a pragmatist and a realist. As such, he based his epistemology and ontology on semiosis and the meaning of signs. Can you clarify how the assertions of your message are related to CSP’s philosophies? Observation of a cedar tree is nice. Cheers Jerry >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Modeling in Humanities : the case of Peirce's Semiotics.(Part A)

List, Robert: It may be useful to add a few comments that may be helpful for the comity of this group. Higher education in the sciences is radically different from eduction in mathematics. I believe that my own personal experience is typical for most, but not all, scientists. Mathematical

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

ts of the > sin-sign in the Rhematic Indexical Legi-sign in the formal logic of the > species of sin-signs.)." > > Edwina > > > > On Sun 15/08/21 12:16 PM , Jerry LR Chandler jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com > sent: > > List: > >> On Aug 15

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Pragmatic Semiosis and Mathematical abduction

John, List: You write: > In any case, this is just one of many cases where it's essential to > distinguish (a) mathematics as the infinite totality of all patterns > and teories about them, (b) the people who discover mathematical > theories, and (c) the application of mathematics in other

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

List: > On Aug 15, 2021, at 10:06 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Now - what is the point of the first view, other than a taxonomic focus on > terms - and what is the point of the second view - which to me at least, > seems to be to examine that 'general rule' as it articulates itself within

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

ld refute any constructivism. > > Best, > Helmut > > > 13. August 2021 um 21:59 Uhr > "Jerry LR Chandler" > wrote: > > Gary F., List: > > On Aug 13, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt <mailto:jonalanschm...@gmail.com>> wrote: [

Re: [PEIRCE-L] André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 25

Gary F., List: > On Aug 13, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: [ quoting Gary F.]] > > "all hypotheses are mathematically generated," I would suggest that a categorical error is being perpetuated in the on-going conversation about the nature of signs and semiosis. In particular,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] [EXTERNAL] Re: Mathematical phaneroscopy (was slow read...

List: > On Aug 9, 2021, at 5:57 AM, JACK ROBERT KELLY CODY > wrote: > > Well mathematics is much more homogenous than other languages or sign-systems > but whilst mathematical truths are universal, existing whatever > language/method one uses, the manner of reaching those truths can surely

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Mathematical phaneroscopy (was slow read...

List: > On Aug 7, 2021, at 9:05 AM, JACK ROBERT KELLY CODY > wrote: > > I agree completely. Similar to Barthes' argument in Death of the Author in > that there is always a degree to which the reader "writes" the text as he/she > reads it; actively constructs rather than passively receives,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Role of Semiotics in Life

ic passage(s) from Peirce's writings you can cite to > support your interpretation. > > Thanks again, > > Jon S. > > On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 2:50 PM Jerry LR Chandler > mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com>> wrote: > Jon: > > The sentence you cite is merely

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Mathematical phaneroscopy (was slow read...

Edwinia: > On Aug 7, 2021, at 6:50 AM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > I think that's an interesting question from Gary F - how do we distinguish > between the actual and the imagined world. If one is seeking absolute certitude, no LINGUISTIC sentence will bridge this gap. How could it? If one

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Role of Semiotics in Life

supposed to represent? > > Thanks, > > 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 > <htt

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Role of Semiotics in Life

is related to the steps > physicochemical-, organisms`-, brain animals` realm, in the sense of what may > happen there? > > Best, > Helmut > > > 04. August 2021 um 04:17 Uhr > "Jerry LR Chandler" > wrote: > > List, Helmut, > >

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Role of Semiotics in Life

List, Helmut, > On Aug 3, 2021, at 3:04 PM, Helmut Raulien wrote: > > "Emergence" for me seems to be a not yet logically fully explained > phenomenon. My temporal assumption (not belief, in which I don´t believe) is, > that it is individuation and downscaling. You may wish to consider the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Thinking in diagrams vs thinking in words

John: While the abstractions of mathematics are extremely powerful, and have had profound influence on our economic systems, such abstractions are far less powerful in analysis of complex systems of chemistry and biology. I believe that your statement below is categorically in error. > On Jul

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Fwd: Re: RE: Thinking in diagrams vs thinking in words

Edwinia: > On Jul 25, 2021, at 12:11 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > Yes, of course. I see what you mean. His categories are indeed 'innate > semiosic predispositions'...and are indeed necessary initial conditions. > Exactly. > > And that's where mathematics comes in - to outline the nature

[PEIRCE-L] Deep Surprises! Was Re: André De Tienne: Slow Read slide 17

Jon, Edwinia, List: The citation "What, in a general way, does the Diagram of Existential Graphs represent the mode of structure of the Phaneron to be like? The question calls for a comparison, and in answering it a little flight of fancy will be in order. It represents the structure of the

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The formal logic of chemistry and the trichotomy.(Revised) Was Re: The 1911 EGs

evant, relational and illational propositional (atomic and molecular) forms is a problem created by human being. This problem is of very recent origin as my references indicated. Cheers Jerry > This puts us 'back' into the analysis of the hylomorphic correlation of > matter and mind. >

[PEIRCE-L] The formal logic of chemistry and the trichotomy.(Revised) Was Re: The 1911 EGs

(List: Please substitute this edited version of my post earlier today. I accidentally submitted the first draft of the post which was extensively revised over the week-end with numerous additions and clarifications. JLRC) List: This submission addresses the potential connections between

[PEIRCE-L] The formal logic of chemistry and the trichotomy. Was Re: The 1911 EGs

List: This submission addresses the potential connections between category theory, formal chemical logic and critical propositions of CSP's philosophy of pragmaticism, such as notions of the trichotomy and existential graphs. At issue is the connection, if any, between the vast plethora of

Re: [PEIRCE-L] EGs as a calculus

List: Partial closure? > On Feb 27, 2021, at 11:57 PM, John F. Sowa wrote: > > JAS> Peirce's actual claim was that his primary purpose when > developing both algebraic and graphical systems of logic was "not at > all the construction of a calculus to aid the drawing of inferences," > but

Handedness as Logical Primitiveness Re: [PEIRCE-L] Consequence as Logical Primitive (was Resending)

Jon: > On Feb 10, 2021, at 7:44 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > JFS: In mathematics and logic, equivalence means freely interchangeable in > all contexts without any change in meaning. > > No, it means freely interchangeable within a particular formal system. In the > context of

Sowa and the Meaning of Equivalence Relation. Was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Consequence as Logical Primitive (was Resending)

List: > On Feb 10, 2021, at 7:44 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:25 PM John F. Sowa > wrote: > and Jerry LRC, > > JFS> In mathematics and logic, equivalence means freely interchangeable in > all contexts without any change in meaning. >

[PEIRCE-L] Re: Ampliative Reasoning (was Asymmetry of Logic and Time)

" > (https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2020-12/msg00016.html > <https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2020-12/msg00016.html>). > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian > www.Lin

Abductive and adductive logic of chemistry was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued logic)

; dictum, that necessary reasoning only explicates the meanings of the terms of > the premisses, to fix our ideas as to what we shall understand by the meaning > of a term. ]] > > Gary f. > > From: Jerry LR Chandler > Sent: 14-Dec-20 23:08 > To: Peirce List > Cc: Jo

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued logic)

t; > 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>

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued logic)

tian > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > <http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 1:01 PM Jerry LR Chandler > mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com>> wrote: > List, Jon: >&

Re: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued logic)

List, Helmut: > > I think, that final causation (or induction) requires a need, which is > something only organisms have. No stone or molecule needs anything. I suggest that semantics of scientific causality and substantially wider than the narrow usage suggested by your philosophy. CSP

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued logic)

List, Jon: > On Dec 14, 2020, at 12:40 PM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > > As Peirce explains in various places, ampliative reasoning produces > conclusions that are not already contained in or implied by the premisses. As > such, it encompasses both abductive/retroductive reasoning and

Existential Graphs and Backchaining Reasoning (was Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Asymmetry of Logic and Time (was multiple-valued logic))

Jon, List: Some comments from the perspective of modern science are offered. While technical language is remote from the languaging of CSP, there is a remote possibility that it may be useful since the notion that atoms beget molecules has not changed. It is well known that abductive

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Kindle editions of Writings

List, Jon To me, the value of these editions would be fantastically enhanced if the indexing is complete and if searching by multiple terms is possible. Any comments from purchasers? Cheers JLRC Sent from my iPad > On Nov 30, 2020, at 9:32 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt > wrote: > >  > Gary F.,

Re: [PEIRCE-L] multiple-valued logic

doctrine > of the tripartite nature of the sign. And the idea that there is a truth that > is prior to semiosis, in my opinion, also is consistent with Peirce’s > thinking. > > Cheers, > Charles Pyle > > > > From: Jerry LR Chandler > Sent: Monday, No

Re: [PEIRCE-L] multiple-valued logic

Edwinia: > On Nov 23, 2020, at 7:10 PM, Edwina Taborsky wrote: > > My understanding of Peirce is that there is nothing outside of semiosis! This is not my understanding of CSP realism. I recall a text that, roughly speaking, asserts that signs are “emanations” of “sin-signs” as objects.

Re: [PEIRCE-L] multiple-valued logic

Hi Charles Your post below left me stone cold! One counter example to your hypothesis (conjecture?) is the language of chemistry. It is built on positive evidence and reproducible empirical observations. The propositional webs of inferences of chemical structures is one of the several facets

[PEIRCE-L] The periodic table and other wallcharts in the teaching of chemistry in St Andrews, 1884–1919

List: As a courtesy to the list members that are seeking to place CSP writings in historical context, the following recently published paper (a remarkably detailed first person look at the philosophy of chemistry as it was pragmatically practiced in the later part of CSP lifetime) is posted

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Peirce's Topical Continuum

List: > On Jul 27, 2020, at 11:14 AM, John F. Sowa wrote: > > Therefore, it's essential to consider developments during the century > *after* Peirce in order to understand Peirce's early versions of those ideas. I agree. Yes, it is essential. To consider both the areas (domains) where his

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Logic of Interpretation

List: > On Jul 19, 2020, at 10:34 AM, John F. Sowa wrote: > > Since Peirce was so far ahead of his time, his contemporaries couldn't > understand them, and he had no examples that he could cite. See: W8, p. 37. Throughout his life, CSP consistently selected example from the bedrock of his

Re: [PEIRCE-L] The Logic of Interpretation

Robert: > On Jul 16, 2020, at 6:56 AM, robert marty wrote: > > Your "demonstration" on the chemical combinations between atoms shows above > all your ignorance of mathematical modelling in chemistry. Again, you give me a deep belly laugh. You can access my writing on the mathematical

Re: [PEIRCE-L] Re: The Logic of Interpretation

y > > Le mer. 15 juil. 2020 à 19:58, Jerry LR Chandler > mailto:jerry_lr_chand...@icloud.com>> a écrit : > Robert: > >> On Jul 15, 2020, at 9:04 AM, robert marty > <mailto:robert.mart...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Indeed I know that I wil

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >