Relatives Of Second Intention • Comment 2

Re: C.S. Peirce • Relatives of Second Intention
Re: FB | Medieval LogicKollbjorn Oldtheyn

Dear Kollbjorn,

The way I understand Peirce’s parable, he is asking, “How do we arrive at a condition far enough removed from our immersion in a current experience to question it, to reflect on it, and thereby conceive the possibility of something other?”  Until we do that we do not have a concept of “not”.

cc: CyberneticsOntolog ForumPeirce ListStructural ModelingSystems Science
cc: FB | Relation TheoryFB | Medieval LogicLaws of Form

This entry was posted in Abstraction, Amphecks, C.S. Peirce, Cognition, Experience, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Graphs, Logical Reflexion, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Second Intentions, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Truth Theory and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

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.