Category Archives: Abduction

{ Information = Comprehension × Extension } • Selection 3

Posted on May 20, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Yet there are combinations of words and combinations of conceptions which are not strictly speaking symbols.  These are of two kinds of which I will give you instances.  We have first cases like: man and horse and kangaroo and whale, and … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Belief Fixation, C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Deduction, Extension, Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, Induction, Inference, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Pragmatism, Scientific Method, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 14 Comments

{ Information = Comprehension × Extension } • Selection 2

Posted on May 19, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

For this purpose, I must call your attention to the differences there are in the manner in which different representations stand for their objects. In the first place there are likenesses or copies — such as statues, pictures, emblems, hieroglyphics, … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Belief Fixation, C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Deduction, Extension, Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, Induction, Inference, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Pragmatism, Scientific Method, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

{ Information = Comprehension × Extension } • Selection 1

Posted on May 19, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Let us now return to the information.  The information of a term is the measure of its superfluous comprehension.  That is to say that the proper office of the comprehension is to determine the extension of the term.  For instance, … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Belief Fixation, C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Deduction, Extension, Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, Induction, Inference, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Pragmatism, Scientific Method, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 16 Comments

{ Information = Comprehension × Extension }

Posted on May 18, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Another angle from which to approach the incidence of signs and inquiry is by way of Charles S. Peirce’s “laws of information” and the corresponding theory of information he developed from the time of his lectures on the “Logic of Science” at … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Belief Fixation, C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Deduction, Extension, Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, Induction, Inference, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Pragmatism, Scientific Method, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 17 Comments

Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry • 24

Posted on May 5, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Jon Alan Schmidt Peirce’s categories are best viewed as categories of relations.  To a first approximation, firstness, secondness, thirdness are simply what all monadic, dyadic, triadic relations, respectively, have in common.  At a second approximation, we … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Aristotle, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Deduction, Induction, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems Engineering, Logic, Mental Models, Peirce, Scientific Method, Semiotics, Systems | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry • 23

Posted on May 1, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Benjamin Udell • Jon Awbrey • Gary Richmond (1) (2) • Jon Alan Schmidt These days it takes me a web search to discover what I was thinking and writing the month before.  I went looking … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Aristotle, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Deduction, Induction, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems Engineering, Logic, Mental Models, Peirce, Scientific Method, Semiotics, Systems | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Types of Reasoning in C.S. Peirce and Aristotle • 2

Posted on April 28, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Ben Udell • Gary Richmond Present business has kept me from following much of the recent discussion on Peirce’s three types of reasoning, but we have been down this road before and so old tunes … 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, Peirce, Peirce List, Philosophy, Probable Reasoning, Propositional Calculus, Propositions, Reasoning, Retroduction, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syllogism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Types of Reasoning in C.S. Peirce and Aristotle • 1

Posted on April 26, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion In one of his earliest treatments of the three types of reasoning, from his Harvard Lectures “On the Logic of Science” (1865), Peirce gives an example that illustrates how one and the same proposition might be … 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, Peirce, Peirce List, Philosophy, Probable Reasoning, Propositional Calculus, Propositions, Reasoning, Retroduction, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syllogism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry • 22

Posted on March 24, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Jerry Rhee • Tom Gollier • Edwina Taborsky All through 1995 I worked on a graduate project in systems engineering at Oakland University developing my ideas about Inquiry Driven Systems.  I wrote a project report on … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Aristotle, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Deduction, Induction, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems Engineering, Logic, Mental Models, Peirce, Scientific Method, Semiotics, Systems | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 14 Comments

Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry • 21

Posted on March 21, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Jerry Rhee • Tom Gollier • Edwina Taborsky Given a working hypothesis, as abduced in the previous post, the next phase of inquiry uses deductive inference to expand the implied consequences of the abductive hypothesis, with … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Aristotle, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Deduction, Induction, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems Engineering, Logic, Mental Models, Peirce, Scientific Method, Semiotics, Systems | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments