The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes : 20

Cross-paradigm communication, like cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural communication, can be difficult.  Sometimes people do not even recognize the existence of other paradigms, disciplines, cultures, long before it comes to the question of their value.  Readers of Peirce know he often uses important words in more primordial senses than later came into fashion.  Other times his usage embodies a distinct analysis of the concept in question.  More than once I’ve found myself remarking how Peirce “anticipates” some strikingly “modern” idea in logic, mathematics, or science, only to find its roots lay deep in the history of thought.  Whether he anticipates a future sense or preserves an ancient sense is not always easy to answer.

cc: Systems ScienceStructural ModelingOntolog ForumLaws of FormCybernetics

This entry was posted in Analogy, C.S. Peirce, Communication, Descriptive Science, Fixation of Belief, Formal Systems, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Normative Science, Paradigms, Peirce, Pragmatic Maxim, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes : 20

  1. Pingback: The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes : 21 | 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.