Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • Comment 2

Re: Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • Comment 1

Definitions tend to call on other terms in need of their own definitions, and so on till the process terminates at the level of primitive terms.  The main two concepts requiring supplementation in Peirce’s definition of a sign relation are the ideas of correspondence and determination.  We can figure out fairly well what Peirce had in mind from things he wrote elsewhere, as I explained in the Sign Relation article I added to Wikipedia 15 years ago.  Not daring to look at what’s left of that, here’s the relevant section from the OEIS Wiki fork.

cc: Category Theory • Cybernetics (1) (2)
cc: Ontolog ForumStructural ModelingSystems Science
cc: FB | SemeioticsLaws of Form • Peirce List (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

This entry was posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Logic, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • Comment 2

  1. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 1 | 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.