Category Archives: Inquiry

Basal Ingredients Of Society • Prologue

Posted on September 1, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

I settled on the acronym BIOS to suggest the vital elements of life in society, a life in association with others, and not just any association but one whose flickers of life are sustained for more than a few vicissitudes … Continue reading →

Posted in Adaptability, Cybernetics, Democracy, Economics, Education, Evolution, Governance, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Learning Organizations, Learning Society, Politics, Reciprocity, Rousseau, Social Compact, Sustainability | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Quiz Biz

Posted on August 26, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

When I taught undergrad math, I told my students that tests were simply a means of communication between student and teacher designed to guide the instruction process, that it was a matter of some inconvenience that third parties had taken … Continue reading →

Posted in Assessment, Communication, Dialogue, Education, Inquiry, Learning, Pedagogy, Teaching, Testing | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 12

Posted on July 7, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Helmut Raulien Definitions and examples for relation composition and the two most commonly arising types of relation reduction can be found in the following articles. Relation Composition Relation Reduction A previous post on this thread gives … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Control, Cybernetics, Dyadic Relations, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Systems Theory, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 11

Posted on July 6, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Helmut Raulien Cf: Relation Reduction • Examples of Projectively Reducible Relations I constructed the “Ann and Bob” examples of sign relations back at the beginning of my Systems Engineering program when I had to explain how … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Control, Cybernetics, Dyadic Relations, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Systems Theory, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Inquiry, Signs, Relations • 1

Posted on July 5, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • A Non-Logical Cognitive Phenomenon Human spontaneous non-demonstrative inference is not, overall, a logical process.  Hypothesis formation involves the use of deductive rules, but is not totally governed by them;  hypothesis confirmation is a non-logical cognitive phenomenon:  … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Action, Analogy, C.S. Peirce, Cognition, Cognitive Science, Communication, Deduction, Foundations of Mathematics, Induction, Information, Information Theory, Inquiry, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Interpretation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Michael Harris, Peirce, Philosophy, Philosophy of Mathematics, Philosophy of Science, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Relevance, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

My Thematics • 2

Posted on June 28, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Communication is so much harder Than mere invention or discovery. Will they have in mind what I have in mind? Will I find the signs?   Will I have the time? There is so much shadow there must be light!

Posted in Anthem, Anthematics, Communication, Discovery, Inquiry, Invention, Mantra, Mathematics, Meditation, Morpheus, Morphism, Mythematics, Nostalgebra, Nostalgia, Reflection, Semeiosis, Semiosis, Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Information Resistance • Ω

Posted on June 10, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

The hardest thing to understand about information is people’s resistance to it.

Posted in Anamnesis, Information, Information Resistance, Inquiry, Meditation, Reflection, Resistance | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Signs Of Signs • 4

Posted on May 31, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • Language About Language But then inevitably I find myself wondering whether a proof assistant, or even a formal system, can make the distinction between “technical” and “fundamental” questions.  There seems to be no logical distinction.  The … Continue reading →

Posted in Aesthetics, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Coherentism, Communication, Connotation, Form, Formal Languages, Foundations of Mathematics, Higher Order Propositions, Illusion, Inquiry, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Interpretation, Interpretive Frameworks, Logic, Mathematics, Objective Frameworks, Objectivism, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Pragmatics, Pragmatism, Recursion, Reflection, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Translation, Triadic Relations, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Signs Of Signs • 3

Posted on May 27, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • Language About Language And if we don’t [keep our stories straight], who puts us away? One’s answer, or at least one’s initial response to that question will turn on how one feels about formal realities.  As … Continue reading →

Posted in Aesthetics, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Coherentism, Communication, Connotation, Form, Formal Languages, Foundations of Mathematics, Higher Order Propositions, Illusion, Inquiry, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Interpretation, Interpretive Frameworks, Logic, Mathematics, Objective Frameworks, Objectivism, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Pragmatics, Pragmatism, Recursion, Reflection, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Translation, Triadic Relations, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Signs Of Signs • 2

Posted on May 27, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • Language About Language I compared mathematics to a “consensual hallucination,” like virtual reality, and I continue to believe that the aim is to get (consensually) to the point where that hallucination is a second nature. I … Continue reading →

Posted in Aesthetics, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Coherentism, Communication, Connotation, Form, Formal Languages, Foundations of Mathematics, Higher Order Propositions, Illusion, Inquiry, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Interpretation, Interpretive Frameworks, Logic, Mathematics, Objective Frameworks, Objectivism, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Pragmatics, Pragmatism, Recursion, Reflection, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Translation, Triadic Relations, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment