Relations & Their Relatives : 1

Sign relations are just special cases of triadic relations, in much the same way that binary operations in mathematics are special cases of triadic relations.  It does amount to a minor complication that we participate in sign relations whenever we talk or think about anything else, but it still makes sense to try and tease the separate issues apart as much as we possibly can.

As far as relations in general go, relative terms are often expressed by slotted frames like “brother of __”, “divisor of __”, and “sum of __ and __”.  Peirce referred to these kinds of incomplete expressions as rhemes or rhemata and Frege used the adjective ungesättigt or unsaturated to convey more or less the same idea.

Switching the focus to sign relations, it’s a fair question to ask what kinds of objects might be denoted by pieces of code like “brother of __”, “divisor of __”, and “sum of __ and __”.  And while we’re at it, what is this thing called denotation, anyway?

Resources

This entry was posted in C.S. Peirce, Denotation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Relations & Their Relatives : 1

  1. Pingback: Survey of Relation Theory • 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Survey of Relation Theory • 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  3. Pingback: Survey of Relation Theory • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s