Boole rationalized the properties of what we now call *boolean multiplication*, roughly equivalent to logical conjunction, in terms of the laws that apply to selective operations. Peirce, in his turn, taking a very significant step of analysis that has seldom been recognized for what it would lead to, does not consider this multiplication to be a fundamental operation, but derives it as a by-product of relative multiplication by a comma relative. Thus, Peirce makes logical conjunction a special case of relative composition.

This opens up a very wide field of inquiry, *the operational significance of logical terms*, but it will be best to advance bit by bit and to lean on simple examples.

Back to Venice and the close-knit party of absolutes and relatives that we entertained when last stopping there.

Here is the list of absolute terms we had been considering before:

Here is the list of *comma inflexions* or *diagonal extensions* of these terms:

One observes that the diagonal extension of is the same thing as the identity relation

Working with our smaller sample of absolute terms, we have already computed the sorts of products that apply the diagonal extension of an absolute term to another absolute term, for instance, these products:

This exercise gave us a bit of practical insight into why the commutative law holds for logical conjunction.

Further insight into the laws that govern this realm of logic, and the underlying reasons why they apply, might be gained by systematically working through the whole variety of different products that are generated by the operational means in sight, namely, the products obtained by appending a comma to each of the terms in and then applying the relative term that results to each of those same terms in

But before we try to explore this territory more systematically, let us equip our intuitions with the forms of graphical and matrical representation that served us so well in our previous adventures.