{ Information = Comprehension × Extension } • Discussion 6

Re: Peirce List Discussion • JAJFSJA

What interests me so much about Peirce’s first legislation of the “laws of information” in his 1865–1866 “Logic of Science” is that the primal twins of Inquiry and Semiotics nestle so closely in their first nest that we can see their kinship far better and more easily than ever we will again.  (I am cautiously optimistic their further development won’t go the same way it did for Rome.)

More than that, whatever disclaimers Peirce may issue about his own originality, I don’t think anyone can fairly encounter his definition of a term’s information as “the measure of its superfluous comprehension” without being downright shocked at its novelty.

This entry was posted in Abduction, C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Deduction, Extension, Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, Induction, Inference, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Information Theory, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Pragmatism, Science, Scientific Method, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to { Information = Comprehension × Extension } • Discussion 6

  1. Pingback: Survey of Semiotic Theory Of Information • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 4 | 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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

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