Inquiry Into Inquiry • Discussion 3

Re: Peirce List • (1) (2)
Re: Inquiry Into Inquiry • Discussion 2

The fact most neglected about the Neglected Argument is its character as an abductive argument, a “Holy Guess” if you will to believe, and as such the most fallible and mutable of hypotheses a happily fallible creature can create.  Its object is an hypostatic abstraction from human experience and the hypostasis has reality in virtue of whatever properties would be consistently assigned to it.  Does the object of the guess take an active part in human evolution or does human evolution play its part in making and reshaping its best guess?

O time, thou must untangle this, not I.
It is too hard a knot for me t’untie.

Twelfth Night • Act 2 Scene 3

Submitted in quality of a case study on the role of abductive inference in inquiry and the role of phenomenology in science.

Resources

cc: Category TheoryCyberneticsOntolog Forum • Peirce List (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
cc: FB | Inquiry Driven SystemsLaws of FormStructural ModelingSystems Science

This entry was posted in Anthem, Balance, Inquiry and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Inquiry Into Inquiry • Discussion 3

  1. Pingback: Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems • 3 | 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.