Jon, list:
Say what? Sometimes, what people say is so abstruse, I can’t figure out
their meaning. And by abstruse, I mean,
“..place of abduction in Peirce's 3-o of inference types…
As far as the rubrics of goal orientation, planning, and problem solving go
there is an extra dimension, or a
Jerry,
In my snarkier days I might've just
answered your “5.189” with “42” but
I'll give it 1 more old college try.
As far as the place of abduction in
Peirce's 3-o of inference types the
best I can say I have already said
back when you first asked about it.
Here is the link to my blog rehash:
But is this not simply
*The surprising fact C is observed;... *
Best,
Jerry R
CP 5.189
On Mon, Mar 6, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Jon Awbrey wrote:
> Ben, Jon, List,
>
> One way to characterize the double aspect of inquiry is
> by contrasting a “Surprise” that demands an Explanation
> with a “Problem” t
Ben, Jon, List,
One way to characterize the double aspect of inquiry is
by contrasting a “Surprise” that demands an Explanation
with a “Problem” that demands a Plan of Action. Here is
how I compared them in my work on Inquiry Driven Systems:
http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Inquiry_Dri
Jon A., Jon S., list,
Jon A. you wrote,
In practice the idea of satificing functioned more as a heuristic
strategy, not unlike Polya's mental maneuvers, and it often served
as a psychological jog or nudge for getting unstuck from the mires
of perfectionism that often block inquiry.
Thread:
JAS:https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2017-03/msg3.html
JA:https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2017-03/msg5.html
JAS:https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2017-03/msg9.html
JA:https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2017-03/msg00022.html
BU:https://list.iupu
Jon S., list,
As far as I can tell, satisficing is just a third way between
optimization and bare-minimum constraint satisfaction (any feasible
solution). Same forest of decision-making and trade-offs; different tree.
Herbert Simon: "...decision makers can satisfice either by finding
optimum
BODY { font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px; }
Jon- I would agree with you. I think of these terminologies as terms
for typologies of the types of relations within the semiosic triad,
according to modal category. Since the Peircean semiosic triad [the
Sign] is dynami
Jon A., List:
It was also Herbert Simon who (rightly, in my view) observed that design in
general, and engineering in particular, is a matter of satisficing rather
than optimization--"good enough" rather than "best possible."
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer,
Ben, List,
I think it was Herbert Simon who I first recall lumping
engineering under the heading of the “design sciences”
but I don't know if that usage was original with him.
Coincidentally, again, if you believe in such things,
I've been reviewing a number of old discussions on the
Peirce List
Ben, List:
Thanks for the comments and links. I read some of those old threads where
Bernard laid out his theory about the ten trichotomies when I was trying to
figure out my own view. Where I sit right now is the rather conventional
3-2-1-4-5-6-7-8-9-10, except that I adjust Peirce's terminolog
Jon S., list,
I just remembered that Bernard Morand, now retired, of Institut
Universitaire de Technologie (France), Département Informatique, who
used to be quite active on peirce-l, wrote a book published in 2004
_Logique de la Conception: Figures de sémiotique générale d'après
Charles S. P
Jon S, list,
In your Part 4 "Beyond Engineering", you wrote,
pronounced “rep-re-sen-TAY-men”
Happy to see the correct stress placement (as Peirce had it in the
Century Dictionary, and John Deely pushed for it too), but it'd be even
better if the "s" were a "z".
I'd guess that you'd count
Jon A., Ben, List:
Thanks for the links. As usual with Peirce, what matters is one's *purpose*;
retroduction can be (and is) employed to posit both plausible *explanations*
for how the world *is* and plausible *designs *for how the world *could *be.
In both cases, I also like the suggestion that
Yes, and I remember years ago when researching for the "Abductive
reasoning" article at Wikipedia, I found papers treating abduction as a
way to infer how one might achieve a pre-designated goal or end, as
opposed to inferring how nature or people did arrive at an observed
outcome or phenomenon
Thread:
JAS:https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2017-03/msg3.html
JA:https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2017-03/msg5.html
JAS:https://list.iupui.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2017-03/msg9.html
Jon,
Thanks for the reply.
When it comes to the complementarity between thought and
List, Jon:
> On Mar 1, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt wrote:
>
> I have argued for years that just as science is perceived as an especially
> systematic way of knowing, likewise engineering could be conceived as an
> especially systematic way of willing; and if this is really the case, th
Stephen:
I certainly agree that icon/index/symbol was *one* of Peirce's many
trichotomies, the one that corresponds specifically to the relation of a
sign/representamen to its (dynamic) object. However, as you presumably
know, his trichotomy for the normative sciences--the 2ns branch of
philosoph
OK, an ethical index. Do we agree a proper Peirce triad is Icon Index
Symbol? If so, do we agree that Peirce did not really flesh out his
thoughts about ethics and aesthetics though he valued both highly? If so,
do we agree that those who know such things will remind us that if Peirce
attached an o
Jon A.: Thanks for your comments.
Stephen: Ditto. Could you please elaborate on what you mean by "an
ethical index" in this context?
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/Jon
Jon, Ben, list,
My apologies. I hardly ever do this any more, but rushed for time, I
managed to send this off-list message to the list. I don't think there's
anything 5oo personal or controversial in it, but I do hate doing this sort
of thing.
Best,
Gary
[image: Gary Richmond]
*Gary Richmond*
off-list
Jon,
I just read parts 3 and 4 of your series in succession. What a fine
accomplishment. Perhaps if more scholars thought with your acuity and wrote
with your clarity and efficiency (succinctness), Peirce studies might be
much further along* in the world generally* than they are now. Thi
A sequential triadic means of actual practical life requires a step past
Peirce although all the elements of this sequential means are implicit in
his writings. I believe it is the need for an ethical index that must be
argued, along with the obvious point that only conscious action that is
conside
Jon,
Thanks for the link.
The duality or complementarity between Thought and Action (Dewey)
or Information and Control (as later generations came to cast it
within cybernetics, computer science, and the systems sciences)
has always been an integral feature of Peirce's Pragmatic Maxim.
Many of my
List:
Part 4, subtitled "Beyond Engineering," is now online at
http://www.structuremag.org/?p=11107. It discusses how *anyone *can use
the logic of ingenuity to imagine possibilities, assess alternatives, and
choose one of them to actualize. I have argued for years that just as
science is percei
List:
Part 3, subtitled "Engineering Reasoning," is now online at
http://www.structuremag.org/?p=10592. It discusses how engineers use the
logic of ingenuity to simulate contingent events with necessary reasoning.
This is my attempt to explain Peirce's whole notion of diagrammatic
reasoning, usin
List:
I meant to post this back around the first of the month, and then kept
forgetting to do so. Part 2, subtitled "Engineering Analysis," is now
online at http://www.structuremag.org/?p=10490. It discusses how engineers
use the logic of ingenuity to solve real problems by analyzing fictitious
27 matches
Mail list logo
