Category Archives: Inquiry

Inquiry Into Inquiry • Understanding 1

Posted on July 26, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Another passage from Russell further illustrates what I see as a critical juncture in his thought.  The graph-theoretic figure he uses in analyzing a complex of logical relationships brings him to the edge of seeing the limits of dyadic analysis … Continue reading →

Posted in Anthem, Initiative, Inquiry | Tagged , , | 8 Comments

Inquiry Into Inquiry • Flash Back

Posted on July 23, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves … Julius Caesar • 1.2.141–142 Signs have a power to inform, to lead our thoughts and thus our actions in accord with reality, to make reality our friend.  … Continue reading →

Posted in Anthem, Initiative, Inquiry | Tagged , , | 9 Comments

Inquiry Into Inquiry • In Medias Res

Posted on July 21, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Daniel Everett DE: I am trying to represent two readings of the three juxtaposed sentences in English.  The first reading is that the judge and the jury both know that Malcolm is guilty.  The second is that the judge knows … Continue reading →

Posted in Anthem, Initiative, Inquiry | Tagged , , | 10 Comments

Inquiry Into Inquiry • On Initiative 2

Posted on July 20, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Scott Aaronson • (1) • (2) • (3) SA: Personally, I’d give neither of them [Bohr or Einstein] perfect marks, in part because they not only both missed Bell’s Theorem, but failed even to ask the requisite question (namely:  … Continue reading →

Posted in Anthem, Initiative, Inquiry | Tagged , , | 9 Comments

Inquiry Into Inquiry • On Initiative 1

Posted on July 10, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton and K.W. Regan • Sorting and Proving Somewhat incidental to the twin themes of Sorting and Proving in computer science, Dick Lipton and Ken Regan made the following observation about an AI program whose sentience or otherwise is currently … Continue reading →

Posted in Anthem, Initiative, Inquiry | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 3

Posted on June 26, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

This is a Survey of blog and wiki resources on the theory of signs, variously known as semeiotic or semiotics, and the actions referred to as semiosis which transform signs among themselves in relation to their objects, all as based … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic, Mathematics, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Functional Logic • Inquiry and Analogy • 21

Posted on June 9, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Inquiry and Analogy • Generalized Umpire Operators To get a better handle on the space of higher order propositions and continue developing our functional approach to quantification theory, we’ll need a number of specialized tools.  To begin, we define a … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Argument, Aristotle, C.S. Peirce, Constraint, Deduction, Determination, Diagrammatic Reasoning, Diagrams, Differential Logic, Functional Logic, Hypothesis, Indication, Induction, Inference, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Probable Reasoning, Propositional Calculus, Propositions, Reasoning, Retroduction, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syllogism, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Functional Logic • Inquiry and Analogy • 20

Posted on June 3, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Inquiry and Analogy • Application of Higher Order Propositions to Quantification Theory Table 21 provides a thumbnail sketch of the relationships discussed in this section. Resources Logic Syllabus Boolean Function Boolean-Valued Function Logical Conjunction Minimal Negation Operator Introduction to Inquiry … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Argument, Aristotle, C.S. Peirce, Constraint, Deduction, Determination, Diagrammatic Reasoning, Diagrams, Differential Logic, Functional Logic, Hypothesis, Indication, Induction, Inference, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Probable Reasoning, Propositional Calculus, Propositions, Reasoning, Retroduction, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syllogism, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Functional Logic • Inquiry and Analogy • 19

Posted on May 31, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Inquiry and Analogy • Application of Higher Order Propositions to Quantification Theory Reflection is turning a topic over in various aspects and in various lights so that nothing significant about it shall be overlooked — almost as one might turn … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Argument, Aristotle, C.S. Peirce, Constraint, Deduction, Determination, Diagrammatic Reasoning, Diagrams, Differential Logic, Functional Logic, Hypothesis, Indication, Induction, Inference, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Probable Reasoning, Propositional Calculus, Propositions, Reasoning, Retroduction, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syllogism, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Functional Logic • Inquiry and Analogy • 18

Posted on May 28, 2022 by Jon Awbrey

Inquiry and Analogy • Application of Higher Order Propositions to Quantification Theory Last time we took up a fourfold scheme of quantified propositional forms traditionally known as a “Square of Opposition”, relating it to a quartet of higher order propositions … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Argument, Aristotle, C.S. Peirce, Constraint, Deduction, Determination, Diagrammatic Reasoning, Diagrams, Differential Logic, Functional Logic, Hypothesis, Indication, Induction, Inference, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Probable Reasoning, Propositional Calculus, Propositions, Reasoning, Retroduction, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syllogism, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments