Monthly Archives: February 2018

Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry 6

Posted on February 28, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Programs are algorithms operating on data structures (Niklaus Wirth).  How do we turn abstract graphs like those used by Charles S. Peirce and G. Spencer Brown into concrete data structures algorithms can manipulate?  There are many ways to do this, but one … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Theme One • A Program Of Inquiry 5

Posted on February 27, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

I started learning programming about the same time I first ran across C.S. Peirce’s Logical Graphs and Spencer Brown’s Laws of Form in the late 1960s and naturally tried each new language and each new set of skills I learned on writing … Continue reading →

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Cybernetics, Formal Languages, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems, Learning Theory, Logic, Peirce, Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Survey of Theme One Program • 2

Posted on February 25, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

This is a Survey of blog and wiki posts relating to the Theme One Program I worked on all through the 1980s.  The aim was to develop fundamental algorithms and data structures to support an integrated learning and reasoning interface, … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 20 Comments

Inquiry Driven Systems • Comment 2

Posted on February 21, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

I just got reminded of an earlier blog post that more or less fits here.  It links to the bibliography I had in hand and mind when I went back to graduate school in systems engineering to synthesize all the … Continue reading →

Posted in Animata, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Intelligent Systems, Learning Systems, Logic, Logical Graphs, Peirce, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Inquiry Driven Systems • Comment 1

Posted on February 18, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Daniel Everett • Edwina Taborsky The role of acquired knowledge bases in inquiry, learning, and reasoning is discussed in the following article and sections. Introduction to Inquiry Driven Systems Inquiry Learning Transfer Testing cc: Peirce List … Continue reading →

Posted in Animata, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Knowledge Bases, Learning, Logic, Peirce, Reasoning, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Systems Theory, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 12

Posted on February 17, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Ontolog Discussion • HP In the Peirce universe “the role that human institutions play in establishing grounding and associated frames of reference and standards” (Hans Polzer) is articulated by reference to “communities of inquiry” and “communities of interpretation”.  Invoking … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 11

Posted on February 14, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • JAS When you ask a question about what something is, you are asking a question about its ontology.  But signhood is not a matter of ontology, it is a form of relation. Re: Peirce List … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 10

Posted on February 9, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • JFS Three-Headed Dogs and Triadic Sign Relations Peirce’s “Sop to Cerberus” got tossed about quite a bit in our discussions across the Web this millennium.  Here’s a record of one occasion from the days when … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

{ Information = Comprehension × Extension } • Discussion 7

Posted on February 2, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Joselle DiNunzio Kehoe • Information and Questions of Consciousness C.S. Peirce put forth the idea that what he called “the laws of information” were key to solving “the puzzle of the validity of scientific inference” and thus to understanding … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Consciousness, Deduction, Extension, Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, Induction, Inference, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Scientific Method, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments