Readings On Determination

Posted on April 11, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

This is an anchor post for a set of readings on determination, focusing on the census of senses Peirce employed in his pragmatic approach to information, inquiry, science, and signs with a pinch of readings from other writers for historical and contemporary context.

I will start with a set of readings I collected some twenty years ago.  Once that groundwork is laid down, there is a set of ideas coming from the relational programming paradigm in computer science I think would mesh nicely with Peirce’s theory of information and could be extended to cover the triadic relations of his semiotics.

Resource

cc: Peirce List

This entry was posted in C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Constraint, Definition, Determination, Differential Logic, Extension, Form, Indication, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intension, Leibniz, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Prigogine, Relation Theory, Relational Programming, Semiotics, Sign Relations and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Readings On Determination

  1. Gary Herstein's avatar Gary Herstein says:
    April 11, 2016 at 6:00 pm

    I’ll be especially interested in following this. As I’m always hungering for spoilers, how do you see this fitting in with non-monotonic reasoning systems in CS &/or AI?

    Like

    Reply
    • Jon Awbrey's avatar Jon Awbrey says:
      April 11, 2016 at 6:12 pm

      That’s a very mixed bag.  I followed that literature many years ago until one of the most prolix streams started spouting nonsense.  As I recall, not always a good bet, my criticism had to do with the fact that few of them grasped how often deductive knowledge bases crash into the ceiling rather than the floor.  I will leave that as a teaser so as not to spoil too much.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
    • Jon Awbrey's avatar Jon Awbrey says:
      April 12, 2016 at 9:20 am

      What I’m really after here has to do with the way that a certain concept of determination figures into Peirce’s better definitions of a sign relation — “better” meaning the definitions that are strong enough to bear the load of a consequential theory.

      That is a very old business with me, and there are developments of it that are still unfinished, but lately I have noticed a number of related issues that are not as clear as they need to be.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  2. Pingback: Readings On Determination • Discussion : 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  3. Pingback: Readings On Determination • Discussion : 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  4. Pingback: Definition and Determination : 14 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  5. Pingback: Readings On Determination • Discussion 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  6. Pingback: Survey of Definition and Determination • 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  7. Pingback: Survey of Definition and Determination • 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  8. Pingback: Survey of Definition and Determination • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  9. Pingback: Survey of Definition and Determination • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  10. Pingback: Survey of Definition and Determination • 4 | Systems Community of Inquiry

Leave a comment

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