Category Archives: Triadic Relations

The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes • 24

Posted on September 22, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Laws of Form • James Bowery The concepts of closure and idempotence are closely related. We usually speak of a closure operator in contexts where the objects acted on are the primary interest, as in topology, where the objects … Continue reading →

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

The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes • 23

Posted on September 20, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Structural Modeling • Joseph Simpson Re: Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives • Selection 1 A critical question in mathematical logic and its applications concerns the threshold of complexity between dyadic (binary) and triadic (ternary) relations, in essence, whether 2-place … Continue reading →

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

The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes • 22

Posted on September 19, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Peirce Society Facebook Page • JC • JA • JA • JA • JC A discussion — well, more like a series of posts and counterposts — arose last week on the Facebook Page of the Charles S. Peirce Society, … Continue reading →

Posted in Analogy, C.S. Peirce, Communication, Descriptive Science, Fixation of Belief, Formal Systems, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Normative Science, Paradigms, Peirce, Pragmatic Maxim, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes • 21

Posted on September 18, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Ontolog Forum • John Bottoms Re: The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes : 20 The reflections in my previous blog post developed over several weeks observing various discussions around the web where people seemed to be … Continue reading →

Posted in Analogy, C.S. Peirce, Communication, Descriptive Science, Fixation of Belief, Formal Systems, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Normative Science, Paradigms, Peirce, Pragmatic Maxim, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Difference That Makes A Difference That Peirce Makes • 20

Posted on September 17, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Cross-paradigm communication, like cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural communication, can be difficult.  Sometimes people do not even recognize the existence of other paradigms, disciplines, cultures, long before it comes to the question of their value.  Readers of Peirce know he often uses … Continue reading →

Posted in Analogy, C.S. Peirce, Communication, Descriptive Science, Fixation of Belief, Formal Systems, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Normative Science, Paradigms, Peirce, Pragmatic Maxim, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • Discussion 1

Posted on April 29, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Semiotic Triangle • John Corcoran Concepts for Peirce are mental symbols, so they fall under the general designation of signs.  For triadic sign relations in general, then, we are dealing with a triadic relation among (1) objects of signs, … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Logic, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Abductive Inference, Concept Formation, Hypothesis Formation • 1

Posted on April 26, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

In pragmatic semiotics, concept formation like hypothesis formation falls under the heading of abductive inference.  A lot has been said and there’s a lot more to say about that, but things are too much in flux right now to allow … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, C.S. Peirce, Complexity, Concept Formation, Differential Calculus, Differential Logic, Dyadic Relations, Dynamical Systems, Dynamics, Geometry, Hypothesis Formation, Inference, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce's Categories, Physics, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Individuality, Identity, Teridentity • 1

Posted on March 31, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Some problems cannot be solved in the paradigms where they first appear, which is why we keep recurring to them without quite freeing ourselves from the loops in which they ensnare us.  Questions about the supposed uniqueness of supposed individuals … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Doctrine of Individuals, Icon Index Symbol, Identity, Individuality, Individuals, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Atoms, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Teridentity, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 4

Posted on January 8, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

This is a Survey of previous blog and wiki posts on the Semiotic Theory Of Information.  All my projects are exploratory in essence but this line of inquiry is more open-ended than most.  The question is: What is information and how … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, C.S. Peirce, Communication, Control, Cybernetics, Deduction, Determination, Discovery, Doubt, Epistemology, Fixation of Belief, Induction, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Information Theory, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Interpretation, Invention, Knowledge, Learning Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Peirce, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, Pragmatic Information, Probable Reasoning, Process Thinking, Relation Theory, Scientific Inquiry, Scientific Method, Semeiosis, Semiosis, Semiotic Information, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Surveys, Triadic Relations, Uncertainty | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 30 Comments

Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 3

Posted on December 11, 2018 by Jon Awbrey

For ease of reference, here are two variants of Peirce’s 1902 definition of a sign, which he gives in the process of defining logic. Selections from C.S. Peirce, “Carnegie Application” (1902) No. 12.  On the Definition of Logic Logic will … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Logic, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , | 24 Comments