Category Archives: Systems of Interpretation

Re: Interpreter and Interpretant • Selection 4 Re: Conceptual Graphs • Tom Gollier Tom, Another discussion coming to mind is one we had on this subject in 2016.  Once again I’ll save a measure of strain on my brain by … Continue reading →

Re: Interpreter and Interpretant • Selection 4 Re: Conceptual Graphs • Tom Gollier TG: Given your diagram of Dewey’s example, I don’t see how the event of rain can be the object (O).  The objects seem more clearly to be … Continue reading →

Re: Interpreter and Interpretant • Selection 1 Re: Laws of Form • Lyle Anderson LA: You can not find “ground” in Aristotle.  If the past three years have shown us anything it is that his assertion: But the mental affections … Continue reading →

Re: Conceptual Graphs • Helmut Raulien   HR: I find it a bit problematic to say, that the sign determines the interpretant, because the sign doesn’t infer, it is the interpreter, who does the inference.  But ok, I guess we … Continue reading →

Interpretation and Inquiry To illustrate the role of sign relations in inquiry we begin with Dewey’s elegant and simple example of reflective thinking in everyday life. A man is walking on a warm day.  The sky was clear the last … Continue reading →

The following selection from Peirce’s “Lowell Lectures on the Logic of Science” (1866) lays out in detail his “metaphorical argument” for the relationship between interpreters and interpretant signs. I think we need to reflect upon the circumstance that every word implies … Continue reading →

In the next passage up for review the hypostatic abstraction of a person to conduct the movement of signs is described by Peirce as a Sop to Cerberus, a rhetorical gambit set to side‑step a persistent difficulty of exposition. It … Continue reading →

Questions about the relationship between “interpreters” and “interpretants” in Peircean semiotics have broken out again.  To put the matter as pointedly as possible — because I know someone or other is bound to — “In a theory of three‑place relations … Continue reading →

Re: Peirce List • Jerry Chandler It is above all important to understand that Peirce’s concept of a sign relation is defined at a higher order of abstraction than any notion of causal or temporal order. A sign relation is … Continue reading →

Re: Peirce List • Kirsti Määttänen One of the chief advantages of Peirce’s systems of logical graphs, entitative and existential, is the way they escape the bounds of 1‑dimensional syntax and thus make it clear that many constraints of order imposed … Continue reading →