Category Archives: Sign Relations

Sign Relations • Comment 7

Posted on January 16, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Semiotic Triangle • Francesco Bellucci I am still looking for a way to build a bridge between the different senses of complete and incomplete being used in this discussion but while that bridge is under construction it may help … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 17 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 6

Posted on January 15, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Semiotic Triangle • JA • FB • JA • FB Two different senses of completeness and incompleteness in regard to signs arose in discussion at this point, as illustrated by the following exchange: FB: “Socrates” for Peirce would be … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 18 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 5

Posted on January 12, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Note. The following links afford a review of the discussion up to this point. Re: Semiotic Triangle • JC • JA • JA • JC • JA • JA • JC • JA • FB • JA • JA Peirce … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 16 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 4

Posted on January 11, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: John Corcoran • Semiotic Triangle • My Comment The following passage is very instructive on several points, illuminating especially the relationship between interpreters (sign‑using agents) and interpretant signs. We are all, then, sufficiently familiar with the fact that many … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 17 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 3

Posted on January 10, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Semiotic Triangle • John Corcoran A sign relation is a formal structure that satisfies a very general definition, on the same order of generality as a mathematical group or geometry.  So any consideration of what a particular sign relation … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 16 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 2

Posted on January 9, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Semiotic Triangle • John Corcoran In a typical sign relation where Socrates belongs to the object domain one sign in the sign domain could be the name “Socrates” and one interpretant in the interpretant domain could be the name … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 17 Comments

Sign Relations • Comment 1

Posted on January 8, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Semiotic Triangle • John Corcoran Peirce’s triadic sign relations are sets of ordered triples having the form where is the object, is the sign, and is the interpretant sign (usually shortened to interpretant).  In other words, a specific sign relation … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic of Relatives, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 16 Comments

The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes • 19

Posted on November 18, 2017 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • John Sowa Peirce uses the word “formal” in a sense that gives it normative force.  It is this sense in which he defines logic as formal semiotic. But taking “formal” in a normative sense weighs against John … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Descriptive Science, Fixation of Belief, Formal Systems, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Normative Science, Pragmatic Maxim, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Ask Meno Questions • Discussion 4

Posted on October 19, 2017 by Jon Awbrey

Re: FB | Foundations of Mathematics • Oguzhan Kosar The questions raised under the heading of “Foundations of Mathematics” are generally considered to fall under the “Philosophy of Mathematics”, in particular, critical reflection on the possibility of mathematical knowledge and … Continue reading →

Posted in Anamnesis, Arete, C.S. Peirce, Descartes, Education, Epistemology, Eternal Return, Foundations of Mathematics, Infinity, Innate Idea, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Knowledge, Learning, Locke, Logic, Mathematics, Medium = Message, Meno, Peirce, Philosophy of Mathematics, Plato, Pragmata, Pragmatism, Pythagoras, Recollection, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Socrates, Tabula Rasa, Teaching, Triadic Relations, Turing Test, Virtue | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sign Relational Manifolds • Discussion 1

Posted on October 10, 2017 by Jon Awbrey

Semiotic Orbits, Manifolds, Arcs The arc of the semiotic universe is long but it bends towards universal harmony. Re: FB | Semiotics, Books, Links, News • What’s at the End of a Chain of Interpretants? Semiotic manifolds, like physical and … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Differential Geometry, Differential Logic, Geometry, Interoperability, Logic, Manifolds, Mathematics, Riemann, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment