Category Archives: Peirce

{ 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

Peirce’s Categories • 7

Posted on May 13, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Ben Udell The week before last my home office got tossed like a salad into the middle of our bedroom floor while workmen worked on various things that needed re-working.  There’s probably a metaphor of … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstraction, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Phenomenology, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Peirce’s Categories • 6

Posted on May 12, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Ben Udell I read Peirce primarily for his insights into logic, mathematics, and science, which are considerable enough to occupy several lifetimes, and I read him the same way I read other thinkers in those … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstraction, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Phenomenology, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Peirce’s Categories • 5

Posted on May 12, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Ben Udell For my part, I see a distinctive paradigm of thought and practice immanent in Peirce’s work and all I’ve been trying to do for many years now has been to nudge it a … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstraction, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Phenomenology, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Peirce’s Categories • 4

Posted on May 11, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussions • (1) • (2) • (3) • (4) • (5) Let me state a few principles that have guided me in my efforts to read and understand Peirce for the past fifty years. There is a … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstraction, Category Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Peirce's Categories, Phenomenology, Philosophy, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Definition and Determination • 14

Posted on May 5, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List (1) (2) I’ve been trying to sort through the explosion of topics and tangents that have arisen over the past month — disruptions in my actual and virtual office spaces have made it hard for me to … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Constraint, Definition, Determination, Extension, Form, Indication, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Peirce, Semiotics, Structure | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 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