Monthly Archives: April 2014

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 11.3 Before I can discuss Peirce’s “number of” function in greater detail I will need to deal with an expositional difficulty I have been carefully dancing around all this time, but one which … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 11.2 NOF Said … Let’s bring together the various things Peirce has said about the number of function up to this point in the paper. NOF 1 I propose to assign to all logical terms, numbers;  … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 11.1 Dear Reader, We have reached a suitable place to pause in our reading of Peirce’s text — actually, it’s more like a place to run as fast as we can along a … Continue reading →

We continue with §3. Application of the Algebraic Signs to Logic. Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Selection 11 The Signs for Multiplication (concl.) The conception of multiplication we have adopted is that of the application of one relation to … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.12 Potential ambiguities in Peirce’s two versions of the “rich black man” example can be resolved by providing them with explicit graphical markups, as shown in Figures 28 and 29. On the other hand, as … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.11 Let us return to the point where we left off unpacking the contents of CP 3.73.  Here Peirce remarks that the comma operator can be iterated at will. In point of fact, since … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.10 The last of Peirce’s three examples involving the composition of triadic relatives with dyadic relatives is shown again in Figure 25. The hypergraph picture of the abstract composition is given in Figure 26. This … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.9 Ergo in numero quo numeramus repetitio unitatum facit pluralitatem; in rerum vero numero non facit pluralitatem unitatum repetitio, vel si de eodem dicam “gladius unus mucro unus ensis unus”. Therefore in the … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.8 Our progress through the 1870 Logic of Relatives brings us in sight of a critical transition point, one which turns on the teridentity relation. The markup for Peirce’s “giver of a horse … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.7 Here is what I get when I analyze Peirce’s “giver of a horse to a lover of a woman” example along the same lines as the dyadic compositions. We may begin with … Continue reading →