C.S. Peirce • On the Definition of Logic

Selections from C.S. Peirce, “Carnegie Application” (1902)

No. 12.  On the Definition of Logic

Logic will here be defined as formal semiotic.  A definition of a sign will be given which no more refers to human thought than does the definition of a line as the place which a particle occupies, part by part, during a lapse of time.  Namely, a sign is something, A, which brings something, B, its interpretant sign determined or created by it, into the same sort of correspondence with something, C, its object, as that in which itself stands to C.  It is from this definition, together with a definition of “formal”, that I deduce mathematically the principles of logic.  I also make a historical review of all the definitions and conceptions of logic, and show, not merely that my definition is no novelty, but that my non-psychological conception of logic has virtually been quite generally held, though not generally recognized.  (NEM 4, 20–21).

No. 12.  On the Definition of Logic [Earlier Draft]

Logic is formal semiotic.  A sign is something, A, which brings something, B, its interpretant sign, determined or created by it, into the same sort of correspondence (or a lower implied sort) with something, C, its object, as that in which itself stands to C.  This definition no more involves any reference to human thought than does the definition of a line as the place within which a particle lies during a lapse of time.  It is from this definition that I deduce the principles of logic by mathematical reasoning, and by mathematical reasoning that, I aver, will support criticism of Weierstrassian severity, and that is perfectly evident.  The word “formal” in the definition is also defined.  (NEM 4, 54).

Reference

  • Charles S. Peirce (1902), “Parts of Carnegie Application” (L 75), published in Carolyn Eisele (ed., 1976), The New Elements of Mathematics by Charles S. Peirce, vol. 4, 13–73.  Online.
This entry was posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic, Mathematics, Peirce, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Sources, Triadic Relations and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to C.S. Peirce • On the Definition of Logic

  1. Pingback: Definition and Determination : 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Definition and Determination : 11 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  3. Pingback: Definition and Determination : 12 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  4. Pingback: Definition and Determination : 13 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  5. Pingback: Icon Index Symbol • 10 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  6. Pingback: The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes : 14 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  7. Pingback: The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes : 19 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  8. Pingback: Sign Relations • Comment 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  9. Pingback: The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes : 28 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  10. Pingback: Mathematical Method • Discussion 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  11. Pingback: Problems In Philosophy • 12 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  12. Pingback: Animated Logical Graphs • 66 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  13. Pingback: Animated Logical Graphs • 69 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  14. Pingback: Animated Logical Graphs • 70 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  15. Pingback: Animated Logical Graphs • 71 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  16. Pingback: Animated Logical Graphs • 72 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  17. Pingback: Animated Logical Graphs • 73 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  18. Pingback: Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • Comment 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  19. Pingback: Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • Discussion 19 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  20. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  21. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  22. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  23. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  24. Pingback: Sign Relations • Discussion 11 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  25. Pingback: Sign Relations • Discussion 12 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  26. Pingback: Sign Relations • Discussion 13 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  27. Pingback: Sign Relations • Discussion 14 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  28. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  29. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.