Monthly Archives: April 2019

Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 4

Re: Semiotic Triangle • John Corcoran Concepts for Peirce are mental symbols, so they fall under the general designation of signs.  For triadic sign relations in general, then, we are considering a triadic relation among objects of signs, signs of … Continue reading

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Logic, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Abductive Inference, Concept Formation, Hypothesis Formation • 1

In pragmatic semiotics, concept formation like hypothesis formation falls under the heading of abductive inference.  A lot has been said and there’s a lot more to say about that, but things are too much in flux right now to allow … Continue reading

Posted in Abduction, C.S. Peirce, Concept Formation, Differential Calculus, Differential Logic, Dyadic Relations, Dynamical Systems, Dynamics, Geometry, Hypothesis, Hypothesis Formation, Inference, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Mental Models, Peirce, Physics, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Signspiel • 1

Re: Ontolog Forum • John Sowa All sorts of players have given us all sorts of spiel about speech acts over the years, but Peirce stands out from the chorus in giving us generative models of semiosis based on triadic … Continue reading

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Logic, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment