Higher Order Sign Relations • 6

Re: Higher Order Sign Relations • 4
Re: Relations, Types, Functions
Re: CyberneticsCliff Joslyn

Cliff Joslyn recommends the following books.

Dear Cliff,

The following Survey page gives a hint of the tack I’ve been taking with category theory since the early days but definitely moving into higher gear during my year at Illinois in the mid 1980s.  John Gray taught a course joint between math and computer science on the Applications of Lambda Calculus and David Plaisted taught a course on Resolution-Unification Theorem Proving, both of which I took and followed up with independent studies.  I spent a heady year making the circuit between math, computer science, and psychology departments and a lot of what I work on today goes back to issues raised in those days.

I know that Survey from a couple years ago still looks a little sketchy but I’ll be working to make it less so as time goes by, especially if I ever get around to unpacking my notes from the basement boxes.

I have been sampling current approaches to categories at sundry sites around the web over the last two decades — John Baez, nCafe, nLab, Zulip Category Chat, Topos Institute, etc.  As great as all that is there’s a reason why it bears but tangentially on the questions I’ve been pursuing.  That has to do with the Peirce Factor and how far a given line of inquiry takes account of it.

As luck would have it, one of the texts John Gray used for his course, Lambek and Scott’s Introduction to Higher Order Categorical Logic, resonated strongly with themes I knew from Peirce and that led me to many adventures of ideas still in progress.  The following set of excerpts I shared with the Standard Upper Ontology Group back in the day may suggest the character of that work.

  • Lambek, J. and Scott, P.J. (1986), Introduction to Higher Order Categorical Logic

There’s a lot more to say, but that’s all I have time for today …



cc: Conceptual GraphsCyberneticsLaws of FormOntolog Forum
cc: FB | Inquiry Driven SystemsStructural ModelingSystems Science

This entry was posted in C.S. Peirce, Gödel Numbers, Higher Order Sign Relations, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Logic, Peirce, Quotation, Reflection, Reflective Interpretive Frameworks, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Higher Order Sign Relations • 6

  1. Pingback: Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  3. Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  4. Pingback: Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems • 5 | 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 )

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.