Category Archives: Logic

Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relations • 6

Posted on June 23, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Ontolog Forum • Joseph Simpson Just by way of clarifying and emphasizing a few points — I use the word relation to mean a special type of mathematical object, namely, a designated subset included within a cartesian product of sets. … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Icon Index Symbol, Knowledge Representation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Ontology, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 16 Comments

Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relations • 5

Posted on June 21, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Ontolog Forum • Ravi Sharma I chose those examples of triadic relations to be as simple as possible without being completely trivial but they already exemplify many features we need to keep in mind in all the more complex … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Icon Index Symbol, Knowledge Representation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Ontology, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 18 Comments

Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relations • 4

Posted on June 21, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

The middle ground between relations in general and the sign relations we need to do logic, inquiry, communication, and so on is occupied by triadic relations, also called ternary or 3‑place relations. Triadic relations are some of the most pervasive … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Icon Index Symbol, Knowledge Representation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Ontology, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 18 Comments

Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relations • 3

Posted on June 20, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

At the wide end of the funnel, here’s an introduction to relations in general, focusing on the discrete mathematical variety we find most useful in applications, for example, as background for relational data bases and empirical data. Relation Theory • OEIS Wiki … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Icon Index Symbol, Knowledge Representation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Ontology, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 16 Comments

Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relations • 2

Posted on June 19, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

I always have trouble deciding whether to start with the genus and drive down to the species or else to start with concrete examples and follow Sisyphus up Mt. Abstraction. Soon after I made my 3rd try at grad school, this … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Icon Index Symbol, Knowledge Representation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Ontology, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 16 Comments

Theme One Program • Discussion 2

Posted on June 11, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Systems Science • Joseph Simpson Warfield gets it right about the relationship between object languages and metalanguages.  Something about the prefix meta- has contributed to a not uncommon misconception that metalanguages are formalized to a higher degree than the … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Theme One Program • Exposition 3

Posted on June 10, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Coding Logical Graphs My earliest experiments coding logical graphs as dynamic “pointer” data structures taught me that conceptual and computational efficiencies of a critical sort could be achieved by generalizing their abstract graphs from trees to the variety graph theorists … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Theme One Program • Exposition 2

Posted on June 9, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

The previous post described the elementary data structure used to represent nodes of graphs in the Theme One program.  This post describes the specific family of graphs employed by the program. Figure 1 shows a typical example of a painted … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Theme One Program • Exposition 1

Posted on June 8, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Theme One is a program for building and transforming a particular species of graph-theoretic data structures, forms designed to support a variety of fundamental learning and reasoning tasks. The program evolved over the course of an exploration into the integration … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Cognition, Computation, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry Driven Systems, Laws of Form, Learning Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Semiotics, Spencer Brown, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Theme One Program • Motivation 6

Posted on June 2, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Comments I made in reply to a correspondent’s questions about delimiters and tokenizing in the Learner module may be worth sharing here. As a part of my M.A. work in psychology I applied my Theme One program to samples of … Continue reading →

Posted in Algorithms, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Computation, Computational Complexity, Cybernetics, Data Structures, Differential Logic, Form, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems, Laws of Form, Learning, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Peirce, Pragmatics, Programming, Propositional Calculus, Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems, Reasoning, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Spencer Brown, Syntax, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments