Category Archives: Semiotics

Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry • 3

Posted on February 17, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton and K.W. Regan • Waves, Hazards, Guesses Aristotle’s apagoge, variously translated as abduction, reduction, or retroduction, is a form of reasoning common to two types of situations. Abduction may involve either of the following two operations. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Aristotle, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Computation, Computational Complexity, Deduction, Induction, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems, Logic, Problem Solving, Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Homunculomorphisms • 2

Posted on February 12, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: John Baez • The Internal Model Principle There’s a far-ranging discussion that takes off from this point, touching on links among analogical reasoning, arrows and functors, cybernetic images, iconic versus symbolic representations, mental models, systems simulations, etc., and just … Continue reading →

Posted in Analogy, Ashby, Automata, Control Systems, Cybernetics, Homunculi, Homunculomorphisms, Iconicity, Information Theory, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intentionality, Internal Models, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Mental Models, Model Theory, Optimal Control, Peirce, Semiotics, Systems Theory, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Prospects for Inquiry Driven Systems • 1

Posted on January 22, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

I finally finished retyping the bibliography to my systems engineering proposal that had gotten lost in a move between computers, so here is a link to the OEIS Wiki copy. Prospects for Inquiry Driven Systems • Bibliography This may be of … Continue reading →

Posted in Adaptive Systems, Animata, Artificial Intelligence, Automated Research Tools, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Constraint Satisfaction Problems, Cybernetics, Differential Logic, Educational Systems Design, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Intelligent Systems Engineering, Learning, Logic, Logic of Science, Logical Graphs, Machine Learning, Peirce, Propositional Calculus, Reasoning, Scientific Method, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Theorem Proving | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 17

Posted on January 4, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • HR We have been considering special properties that a dyadic relation may have, in particular, the following two symmetry properties. A dyadic relation is symmetric if being in implies that is in A dyadic relation is … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Considerate Reason • 2

Posted on December 29, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton • Why Is Discrete Math Hard To Teach? The Liberal Arts trivium of Grammar, Logic, Rhetoric received a latter day echo in the Unified Science trivium of Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatics, which was in turn the way Charles Morris … Continue reading →

Posted in Argument, C.S. Peirce, Computer Programming, Discrete Mathematics, Education, Educational Systems Design, Grammar, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Interpretation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Pragmatics, Relation Theory, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Considerate Reason • 1

Posted on December 28, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton • Why Is Discrete Math Hard To Teach? Rhetoric deals with forms of argument that consider the interpreter.  As considerate reason, it is involved in the style of training the Greeks dubbed education, “leading out”, and it … Continue reading →

Posted in Argument, C.S. Peirce, Computer Programming, Discrete Mathematics, Education, Educational Systems Design, Grammar, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Interpretation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Pragmatics, Relation Theory, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 16

Posted on December 22, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • HR I would not want the dyadic case to detain us too long, as often happens when we frame a simple example for the purpose of illustration and then fail to rise beyond it. I … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 15

Posted on December 12, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • HR The immediate task is to get clear about the critical relationship between relations as sets and elementary relations as elements of those sets.  What’s at stake is understanding the extensional aspect of relations.  Beyond … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 14

Posted on December 10, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • GF • JBD • HR I think a few people are making this harder than it needs to be. Let’s put aside potential subtleties about elementary vs. individual vs. infinitesimal relatives and simply use “elementary … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 13

Posted on December 8, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussions • (1) • (2) First off, we need to be clear about the difference between objects and signs: Relations are formal objects of discussion and thought while relative terms are signs employed to denote relations.  (The … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments