Inquiry Into Inquiry

Mathematical Demonstration and the Doctrine of Individuals • 1

Posted on February 22, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Selection from C.S. Peirce’s “Logic Of Relatives” (1870)

Demonstration of the sort called mathematical is founded on suppositions of particular cases. The geometrician draws a figure; the algebraist assumes a letter to signify a single quantity fulfilling the required conditions. But while the mathematician supposes an individual case, his hypothesis is yet perfectly general, because he considers no characters of the individual case but those which must belong to every such case.

The advantage of his procedure lies in the fact that the logical laws of individual terms are simpler than those which relate to general terms, because individuals are either identical or mutually exclusive, and cannot intersect or be subordinated to one another as classes can.

Mathematical demonstration is not, therefore, more restricted to matters of intuition than any other kind of reasoning. Indeed, logical algebra conclusively proves that mathematics extends over the whole realm of formal logic; and any theory of cognition which cannot be adjusted to this fact must be abandoned. We may reap all the advantages which the mathematician is supposed to derive from intuition by simply making general suppositions of individual cases. (CP 3.92)

References

Peirce, C.S. (1870), “Description of a Notation for the Logic of Relatives, Resulting from an Amplification of the Conceptions of Boole’s Calculus of Logic”, Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 9, 317–378, 26 January 1870. Reprinted, Collected Papers 3.45–149, Chronological Edition 2, 359–429. Online (1) (2) (3).
Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958.
Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–.

Resources

Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Deduction, Doctrine of Individuals, Foundations of Mathematics, Identity, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematical Demonstration, Mathematics, Relation Theory | Tagged C.S. Peirce, Deduction, Doctrine of Individuals, Foundations of Mathematics, Identity, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematical Demonstration, Mathematics, Relation Theory | 5 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • 3

Posted on February 18, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Here are two ways of looking at the divisibility relation, a dyadic relation of fundamental importance in number theory.

Table 1 shows the first few ordered pairs of the relation on positive integers corresponding to the relative term, “divisor of”. Thus, the ordered pair ${i\!:\!j}$ appears in the relation if and only if ${i}$ divides ${j},$ for which the usual notation is ${i|j}.$

Table 2 shows the same information in the form of a logical matrix. This has a coefficient of ${1}$ in row ${i}$ and column ${j}$ when ${i|j},$ otherwise it has a coefficient of ${0}.$ (The zero entries have been omitted for ease of reading.)

Just as matrices in linear algebra represent linear transformations, these logical arrays and matrices represent logical transformations.

Resources

cc: Category Theory • Cybernetics • Ontolog • Structural Modeling • Systems Science
cc: FB | Relation Theory • Laws of Form • Peirce List

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatism, Realism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatism, Realism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • 2

Posted on February 17, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

What is the relationship between “logical relatives” and “mathematical relations”? The word relative used as a noun in logic is short for relative term — as such it refers to an item of language used to denote a formal object.

What kind of object is that? The way things work in mathematics we are free to make up a formal object corresponding directly to the term, so long as we can form a consistent theory of it, but it’s probably easier and more practical in the long run to relate the relative term to the kinds of relations ordinarily treated in mathematics and universally applied in relational databases.

In those contexts a relation is just a set of ordered tuples and if you are a fan of strong typing like I am, such a set is always set in a specific setting, namely, it’s a subset of a specified cartesian product.

Peirce wrote $k$ -tuples $(x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_{k-1}, x_k)$ in the form $x_1 : x_2 : \ldots : x_{k-1} : x_k$ and referred to them as elementary $k$ -adic relatives. He treated a collection of $k$ -tuples as a logical aggregate or logical sum and often regarded them as being arranged in $k$ -dimensional arrays.

Time for some concrete examples, which I will give in the next post.

Resources

cc: Category Theory • Cybernetics • Ontolog • Structural Modeling • Systems Science
cc: FB | Relation Theory • Laws of Form • Peirce List

Relations & Their Relatives • 1

Posted on February 17, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Sign relations are special cases of triadic relations in much the same way binary operations in mathematics are special cases of triadic relations. It amounts to a minor complication that we participate in sign relations whenever we talk or think about anything else but it still makes sense to try and tease the separate issues apart as much as we possibly can.

As far as relations in general go, relative terms are often expressed by slotted frames like “brother of __”, “divisor of __”, and “sum of __ and __”. Peirce referred to these kinds of incomplete expressions as rhemes or rhemata and Frege used the adjective ungesättigt or unsaturated to convey more or less the same idea.

Switching the focus to sign relations, it’s fair to ask what kinds of objects might be denoted by pieces of code like “brother of __”, “divisor of __”, and “sum of __ and __”. And while we’re at it, what is this thing called denotation, anyway?

Resources

cc: Category Theory • Cybernetics • Ontolog • Structural Modeling • Systems Science
cc: FB | Relation Theory • Laws of Form • Peirce List

Peirce’s 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3 • Selection 6

Posted on February 16, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives (concl.)

222. Instead of considering the system of a relative as consisting of non-relative individuals, we may conceive of it as consisting of relative individuals. Thus, since

$\begin{array}{*{11}{c}} \mathrm{A} & = & \mathrm{A:A} & + & \mathrm{A:B} & + & \mathrm{A:C} & + & \mathrm{A:D} & + & \text{etc.}, \end{array}$

we have

$\begin{array}{*{11}{c}} \mathrm{A:B} & = & \mathrm{(A:A):B} & + & \mathrm{(A:B):B} & + & \mathrm{(A:C):B} & + & \mathrm{(A:D):B} & + & \text{etc.} \end{array}$

But

$\begin{array}{*{11}{c}} \mathrm{B} & = & \mathrm{B:A} & + & \mathrm{B:B} & + & \mathrm{B:C} & + & \mathrm{B:D} & + & \text{etc.}; \end{array}$

so that

$\begin{array}{*{11}{c}} \mathrm{A:B} & = & \mathrm{A:(B:A)} & + & \mathrm{A:(B:B)} & + & \mathrm{A:(B:C)} & + & \mathrm{A:(B:D)} & + & \text{etc.} \end{array}$

References

Peirce, C.S. (1880), “On the Algebra of Logic”, American Journal of Mathematics 3, 15–57. Collected Papers (CP 3.154–251), Chronological Edition (CE 4, 163–209).
Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 3 : Exact Logic, 1933.
Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–. Volume 4 (1879–1884), 1986.

Resources

Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives

Posted in Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | 9 Comments

Peirce’s 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3 • Selection 5

Posted on February 15, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives (cont.)

221. From the definition of a simple term given in the last section, it follows that every simple relative is the negative of an individual term. But while in non-relative logic negation only divides the universe into two parts, in relative logic the same operation divides the universe into $2^n$ parts, where $n$ is the number of objects in the system which the relative supposes; thus,

$\begin{array}{*{5}{l}} \infty & = & \mathrm{A} & + & \overline{\mathrm{A}} \end{array}$

$\begin{array}{*{9}{l}} \infty & = & \mathrm{A:B} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:B} & + & \mathrm{A:\overline{B}} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:\overline{B}} \end{array}$

$\begin{array}{*{9}{l}} \infty & = & \mathrm{A:B:C} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:B:C} & + & \mathrm{A:\overline{B}:C} & + & \mathrm{A:B:\overline{C}} \\[4pt] & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:\overline{B}:\overline{C}} & + & \mathrm{A:\overline{B}:\overline{C}} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:B:\overline{C}} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:\overline{B}:C}. \end{array}$

Here, we have

$\begin{array}{*{5}{l}} \mathrm{A} & = & \mathrm{A:B} & + & \mathrm{A:\overline{B}} \\[4pt] \mathrm{\overline{A}} & = & \mathrm{\overline{A}:B} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:\overline{B}} \end{array}$

$\begin{array}{*{5}{l}} \mathrm{A:B} & = & \mathrm{A:B:C} & + & \mathrm{A:B:\overline{C}} \\[4pt] \mathrm{A:\overline{B}} & = & \mathrm{A:\overline{B}:C} & + & \mathrm{A:\overline{B}:\overline{C}} \\[4pt] \mathrm{\overline{A}:B} & = & \mathrm{\overline{A}:B:C} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:B:\overline{C}} \\[4pt] \mathrm{\overline{A}:\overline{B}} & = & \mathrm{\overline{A}:\overline{B}:C} & + & \mathrm{\overline{A}:\overline{B}:\overline{C}}. \end{array}$

It will be seen that a term which is individual when considered as $n$ -fold is not so when considered as more than $n$ -fold; but an $n$ -fold term when made $(m + n)$ -fold, is individual as to $n$ members of the system, and indefinite as to $m$ members.

References

Peirce, C.S. (1880), “On the Algebra of Logic”, American Journal of Mathematics 3, 15–57. Collected Papers (CP 3.154–251), Chronological Edition (CE 4, 163–209).
Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 3 : Exact Logic, 1933.
Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–. Volume 4 (1879–1884), 1986.

Resources

Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives

Peirce’s 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3 • Selection 4

Posted on February 12, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives (cont.)

220. Every relative, like every term of singular reference, is general; its definition describes a system in general terms; and, as general, it may be conceived either as a logical sum of individual relatives, or as a logical product of simple relatives. An individual relative refers to a system all the members of which are individual. The expressions

$\begin{array}{lll} (\mathrm{A : B}) & \qquad & (\mathrm{A : B : C}) \end{array}$

may denote individual relatives. Taking dual individual relatives, for instance, we may arrange them all in an infinite block, thus,

$\begin{array}{*{11}{c}} \mathrm{A:A}&&\mathrm{A:B}&&\mathrm{A:C}&&\mathrm{A:D}&&\mathrm{A:E}&&\text{etc.} \\[4pt] \mathrm{B:A}&&\mathrm{B:B}&&\mathrm{B:C}&&\mathrm{B:D}&&\mathrm{B:E}&&\text{etc.} \\[4pt] \mathrm{C:A}&&\mathrm{C:B}&&\mathrm{C:C}&&\mathrm{C:D}&&\mathrm{C:E}&&\text{etc.} \\[4pt] \mathrm{D:A}&&\mathrm{D:B}&&\mathrm{D:C}&&\mathrm{D:D}&&\mathrm{D:E}&&\text{etc.} \\[4pt] \mathrm{E:A}&&\mathrm{E:B}&&\mathrm{E:C}&&\mathrm{E:D}&&\mathrm{E:E}&&\text{etc.} \\[4pt] \text{etc.}&& \text{etc.}&& \text{etc.}&& \text{etc.}&& \text{etc.}&& \text{etc.} \end{array}$

In the same way, triple individual relatives may be arranged in a cube, and so forth. The logical sum of all the relatives in this infinite block will be the relative universe, $\infty,$ where

$x \,-\!\!\!< \infty,$

whatever dual relative $x$ may be. It is needless to distinguish the dual universe, the triple universe, etc., because, by adding a perfectly indefinite additional member to the system, a dual relative may be converted into a triple relative, etc. Thus, for lover of a woman, we may write lover of a woman coexisting with anything. In the same way, a term of single reference is equivalent to a relative with an indefinite correlate; thus, woman is equivalent to woman coexisting with anything. Thus, we shall have

$\begin{array}{*{13}{c}} \mathrm{A} & = & \mathrm{A:A} & + & \mathrm{A:B} & + & \mathrm{A:C} & + & \mathrm{A:D} & + & \mathrm{A:E} & + & \text{etc.} \end{array}$

$\begin{array}{*{11}{c}} \mathrm{A:B} & = & \mathrm{A:B:A} & + & \mathrm{A:B:B} & + & \mathrm{A:B:C} & + & \mathrm{A:B:D} & + & \text{etc.} \end{array}$

References

Peirce, C.S. (1880), “On the Algebra of Logic”, American Journal of Mathematics 3, 15–57. Collected Papers (CP 3.154–251), Chronological Edition (CE 4, 163–209).
Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 3 : Exact Logic, 1933.
Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–. Volume 4 (1879–1884), 1986.

Resources

Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives

Peirce’s 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3 • Selection 3

Posted on February 11, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives

218. A relative is a term whose definition describes what sort of a system of objects that is whose first member (which is termed the relate) is denoted by the term; and names for the other members of the system (which are termed the correlates) are usually appended to limit the denotation still further. In these systems the order of the members is essential; so that $(\mathrm{A}, \mathrm{B}, \mathrm{C})$ and $(\mathrm{A}, \mathrm{C}, \mathrm{B})$ are different systems. As an example of a relative, take ‘buyer of ── for ── from ── ’; we may append to this three correlates, thus, ‘buyer of every horse of a certain description in the market for a good price from its owner’.

219. A relative of only one correlate, so that the system it supposes is a pair, may be called a dual relative; a relative of more than one correlate may be called plural; A non-relative term may be called a term of singular reference.

References

Peirce, C.S. (1880), “On the Algebra of Logic”, American Journal of Mathematics 3, 15–57. Collected Papers (CP 3.154–251), Chronological Edition (CE 4, 163–209).
Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 3 : Exact Logic, 1933.
Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–. Volume 4 (1879–1884), 1986.

Resources

Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives

Six Ways of Looking at a Triadic Relation ⌬ 1

Posted on February 4, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

A triadic relation and its converses form a set of $3! = 6$ triadic relations all together, six grammatically and rhetorically distinct ways of representing what is logically the same information. Peirce illustrates the situation as follows, with six variations on the theme of giving.

So in a triadic fact, say, for example

$A ~\mathrm{gives}~ B ~\mathrm{to}~ C$

we make no distinction in the ordinary logic of relations between the subject nominative, the direct object, and the indirect object. We say that the proposition has three logical subjects. We regard it as a mere affair of English grammar that there are six ways of expressing this:

These six sentences express one and the same indivisible phenomenon.
(EP 2, 170–171).

References

Peirce, C.S., “The Categories Defended”, Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism : Lecture 3 (MS 308, delivered on 9 April 1903). Published in Collected Papers (CP 5.66–81, 88–92, in part), Harvard Lectures (HL 167–188), Essential Peirce : Volume 2 (EP 2, 160–178).
Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 5 : Pragmatism and Pragmaticism, 1934. (Cited as CP).
Peirce, C.S., Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking : The 1903 Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism, Patricia Ann Turrisi (ed.), State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, 1997. (Cited as HL).
Peirce, C.S., The Essential Peirce : Selected Philosophical Writings, Volume 2 (1893–1913), Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1998. (Cited as EP 2).

cc: Cybernetics • Ontolog • Peirce List (1) (2) (3) • Structural Modeling • Systems Science
cc: FB | Relation Theory • Laws of Form

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Philosophy, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged C.S. Peirce, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Philosophy, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | 11 Comments

Peirce’s 1880 “Algebra Of Logic” Chapter 3 • Selection 2

Posted on February 3, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§1. Individual and Simple Terms (concl.)

216. Just as in mathematics we speak of infinitesimals and infinites, which are fictitious limits of continuous quantity, and every statement involving these expressions has its interpretation in the doctrine of limits, so in logic we may define an individual, $\mathrm{A},$ as such a term that

$\mathrm{A} \,\overline{-\!\!\!<}\, 0,$

but such that if

$x < \mathrm{A}$

then

$x \,-\!\!\!< 0.$

And in the same way, we may define the simple, $\alpha,$ as such a term that

$\infty \,\overline{-\!\!\!<}\, \alpha,$

but such that if

$\alpha < x$

then

$\infty \,-\!\!\!< x.$

The individual and the simple, as here defined, are ideal limits, and every statement about either is to be interpreted by the doctrine of limits.

217. Every term may be conceived as a limitless logical sum of individuals, or as a limitless logical product of simples; thus,

$\begin{array}{lll} a & = & \mathrm{A}_1 + \mathrm{A}_2 + \mathrm{A}_3 + \mathrm{A}_4 + \mathrm{A}_5 + \text{etc.} \\[8pt] \overline{a} & = & \overline{\mathrm{A}}_1 \times \overline{\mathrm{A}}_2 \times \overline{\mathrm{A}}_3 \times \overline{\mathrm{A}}_4 \times \overline{\mathrm{A}}_5 \times \text{etc.} \end{array}$

It will be seen that a simple is the negative of an individual.

References

Peirce, C.S. (1880), “On the Algebra of Logic”, American Journal of Mathematics 3, 15–57. Collected Papers (CP 3.154–251), Chronological Edition (CE 4, 163–209).
Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Volume 3 : Exact Logic, 1933.
Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–. Volume 4 (1879–1884), 1986.

Resources

Peirce’s 1870 Logic Of Relatives

Search for:
Elsewhere
- Jon Awbrey • Academia.edu
- Jon Awbrey • Arisbe List
- Jon Awbrey • Inquiry List
- Jon Awbrey • InterSciWiki
- Jon Awbrey • Mathstodon
- Jon Awbrey • MyWikiBiz
- Jon Awbrey • Oeis Wiki
- Jon Awbrey • PlanetMath
- Jon Awbrey • ResearchGate
- Jon Awbrey • WordPress
Blogroll
- A-Philosopher's Chair
- Autopoiesis
- Azimuth Blog
- Azimuth Forum
- Badass Teachers
- Big Education Ape
- Bob Walters
- Cameron Counts
- Cathy O'Neil
- Chorasimilarity
- Christopher Chase
- Coevolving Innovations
- Colins Blog
- Computational Complexity
- Computational Culture
- Cora Angier Sowa
- Cory Doctorow
- Crazy Crawfish
- Curmudgucation
- David Ellerman
- David Wood
- Devlin's Angle
- Diana Senechal
- Diane Ravitch
- Drew Flieder
- Error Statistics Philosophy
- Evolution Games
- Fred Klonsky
- Gödel's Lost Letter • New
- Gödel's Lost Letter • Old
- Gil Kalai
- Gowers's Weblog
- Hidden Assumptions
- Hieroglyph Blog
- https://drewflieder.xyz/
- Humanities & Sciences
- Improbable Science
- In Theory
- Inquire Within
- Joel David Hamkins
- John F. Sowa
- John Pappas
- Judea Pearl • Causality
- Julien Clément
- Len Troncale • LifeWork
- Logic Matters
- London Institute∫Mathematical Sciences
- Lou Kauffman
- Luciano Floridi
- Lumber Room
- Marcus Jenal
- Mark Johnson
- Markability
- Math ∩ Programming
- Mathematics & Computation
- Mathematics w\o Apologies
- Mercedes Schneider
- Michael O. Church
- Michael Weiss
- Michigan Populist
- Nicole Rust
- Nora Bateson
- Not Even Wrong
- Peirce Blog
- Peirce Reader
- Persiflage
- Philosophasters
- Poetry ∩ Math
- Poor Richard
- Pragmata
- Preposterous Universe
- Progressive Populist
- Punk Rock OR
- Quantum of Explanation
- Quomodocumque
- Renaissance Mathematicus
- Rice History Corner
- Richard E. Haskell
- Richard Zach
- Robert Marty
- Scott Aaronson
- Shtetl-Optimized
- Social Fixer
- Tambo University
- Tanya Khovanova
- The Becoming Radical
- The Chalk Face
- The Cutting Edge
- The Progressive
- Theodora Goss
- Theorem Du Jour
- Thorbjørn Mann
- Tim Gowers
- Topos Institute
- Understanding Uncertainty
- Useful Stuff
- Wikispaces Blog
- Windows On Theory
Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Email Address:
Recent Posts
- Information = Comprehension × Extension • Selection 1
- Information = Comprehension × Extension • Preamble
- Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 4
- Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 3
- Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 2
- Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 1
- Reflection On Recursion • Discussion 1
- Reflection On Recursion • 4
- Reflection On Recursion • 3
- Reflection On Recursion • 2
- Reflection On Recursion • 1
- Reflective Interpretive Frameworks • Incident 1
- Differential Logic • Discussion 17
- Differential Logic • The Logic of Change and Difference
- Differential Logic • 18
- Differential Logic • 17
- Differential Logic • 16
- Differential Logic • 15
- Differential Logic • 14
- Differential Logic • 13
- Differential Logic • 12
- Differential Logic • 11
- Differential Logic • 10
- Differential Logic • 9
- Differential Logic • 8
- Differential Logic • 7
- Differential Logic • 6
- Differential Logic • 5
- Differential Logic • 4
- Differential Logic • 3
- Differential Logic • 2
- Differential Logic • 1
- Differential Logic • Overview
- Sign Relations • Graphical Representations
- Riffs and Rotes • Happy New Year 2026
- Sign Relations • Semiotic Equivalence Relations 2
- Sign Relations • Semiotic Equivalence Relations 1
- Sign Relations • Ennotation
- Sign Relations • Connotation
- Sign Relations • Denotation
- Sign Relations • Dyadic Aspects
- Sign Relations • Examples
- Sign Relations • Signs and Inquiry
- Sign Relations • Definition
- Sign Relations • Anthesis
- Cactus Language • Semantics 8
- Cactus Language • Semantics 7
- Cactus Language • Semantics 6
- Cactus Language • Semantics 5
- Cactus Language • Semantics 4

	Information = Compre… on Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic I…
	Information = Compre… on Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic I…
	Information = Compre… on Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic I…
	Survey of Pragmatic… on Information = Comprehension ×…
	Information = Compre… on Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic I…
	Icon, Likeness, Like… on Icon, Likeness, Likely Story,…
	Survey of Semiotics,… on Icon, Likeness, Likely Story,…
	Icon, Likeness, Like… on Icon, Likeness, Likely Story,…
	Survey of Semiotics,… on Icon, Likeness, Likely Story,…
	Survey of Semiotics,… on Icon, Likeness, Likely Story,…

Archives
- June 2026 (3)
- May 2026 (3)
- April 2026 (5)
- March 2026 (7)
- February 2026 (15)
- January 2026 (2)
- December 2025 (10)
- November 2025 (1)
- October 2025 (8)
- September 2025 (8)
- August 2025 (11)
- July 2025 (14)
- June 2025 (12)
- May 2025 (22)
- April 2025 (8)
- March 2025 (11)
- February 2025 (10)
- January 2025 (10)
- December 2024 (35)
- November 2024 (20)
- October 2024 (16)
- September 2024 (24)
- August 2024 (10)
- July 2024 (15)
- June 2024 (18)
- May 2024 (26)
- April 2024 (24)
- March 2024 (18)
- February 2024 (25)
- January 2024 (12)
- December 2023 (24)
- November 2023 (18)
- October 2023 (18)
- September 2023 (10)
- August 2023 (9)
- July 2023 (17)
- June 2023 (18)
- May 2023 (8)
- April 2023 (14)
- March 2023 (3)
- February 2023 (1)
- January 2023 (8)
- December 2022 (2)
- November 2022 (8)
- October 2022 (4)
- September 2022 (10)
- August 2022 (14)
- July 2022 (18)
- June 2022 (14)
- May 2022 (12)
- April 2022 (13)
- March 2022 (1)
- February 2022 (2)
- January 2022 (2)
- December 2021 (4)
- November 2021 (15)
- October 2021 (20)
- September 2021 (18)
- August 2021 (22)
- July 2021 (28)
- June 2021 (18)
- May 2021 (17)
- April 2021 (13)
- March 2021 (14)
- February 2021 (12)
- January 2021 (12)
- December 2020 (10)
- November 2020 (12)
- October 2020 (8)
- September 2020 (10)
- August 2020 (14)
- July 2020 (10)
- June 2020 (20)
- May 2020 (15)
- April 2020 (11)
- March 2020 (16)
- February 2020 (7)
- January 2020 (6)
- December 2019 (12)
- November 2019 (18)
- October 2019 (21)
- September 2019 (10)
- August 2019 (5)
- July 2019 (12)
- June 2019 (1)
- May 2019 (6)
- April 2019 (3)
- March 2019 (3)
- February 2019 (14)
- January 2019 (13)
- December 2018 (12)
- November 2018 (1)
- October 2018 (6)
- September 2018 (9)
- August 2018 (8)
- July 2018 (3)
- June 2018 (14)
- May 2018 (8)
- April 2018 (6)
- March 2018 (6)
- February 2018 (9)
- January 2018 (11)
- December 2017 (4)
- November 2017 (12)
- October 2017 (4)
- September 2017 (6)
- August 2017 (10)
- July 2017 (9)
- June 2017 (14)
- May 2017 (8)
- April 2017 (18)
- March 2017 (14)
- February 2017 (3)
- January 2017 (1)
- December 2016 (2)
- November 2016 (11)
- October 2016 (1)
- September 2016 (2)
- August 2016 (2)
- July 2016 (1)
- June 2016 (2)
- May 2016 (15)
- April 2016 (14)
- March 2016 (22)
- February 2016 (12)
- January 2016 (3)
- December 2015 (7)
- November 2015 (2)
- October 2015 (9)
- September 2015 (24)
- August 2015 (9)
- July 2015 (9)
- June 2015 (6)
- May 2015 (15)
- April 2015 (5)
- March 2015 (7)
- February 2015 (14)
- January 2015 (7)
- December 2014 (2)
- November 2014 (6)
- October 2014 (12)
- September 2014 (8)
- August 2014 (7)
- July 2014 (3)
- June 2014 (12)
- May 2014 (16)
- April 2014 (12)
- March 2014 (8)
- February 2014 (17)
- January 2014 (12)
- December 2013 (10)
- November 2013 (12)
- October 2013 (5)
- September 2013 (2)
- August 2013 (5)
- July 2013 (1)
- June 2013 (5)
- May 2013 (9)
- April 2013 (9)
- March 2013 (7)
- February 2013 (8)
- January 2013 (10)
- December 2012 (14)
- November 2012 (5)
- October 2012 (14)
- September 2012 (5)
- August 2012 (8)
- July 2012 (3)
- June 2012 (14)
- May 2012 (9)
- April 2012 (4)
- March 2012 (4)
- February 2012 (4)
- January 2012 (1)
- December 2011 (2)
- October 2008 (2)
- September 2008 (1)
- August 2008 (2)
- July 2008 (4)
- December 2005 (1)
Blog Stats
- 1,823,079 hits
June 2026

M T W T F S S

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22 23 24 25 26 27 28

29 30

« May
Categories
- Abduction
- Abraham Lincoln
- Abstraction
- Absurdity
- Accountability
- Ackermann
- Acronym
- Action
- Adaptability
- Adaptive Systems
- Aesthetics
- Albert Camus
- Algebra
- Algebra of Logic
- Algorithms
- Amphecks
- Analogy
- Analytic Geometry
- Anamnesis
- Animata
- Annual Report
- Anthem
- Anthematics
- Appearance
- Arete
- Argument
- Aristotle
- Arithmetic
- Arithmetization
- Artem Kaznatcheev
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence
- Artistic Differences
- Ashby
- Assertion
- Assessment
- Authority
- Automata
- Automated Research Tools
- Automatic Theorem Proving
- Automation
- Balance
- Beauty
- Belief
- Belief Fixation
- Belief Systems
- Bertrand Russell
- Biological Systems
- Boole
- Boolean Algebra
- Boolean Difference Calculus
- Boolean Functions
- C.P. Snow
- C.S. Peirce
- Cactus Graphs
- Cardinality
- Carnap
- Cartesian Coordinate System
- Cartesian Philosophy
- Cartesian Product
- Catalan Numbers
- Category Theory
- Causality
- Certainty
- Chance
- Change
- Character
- Characteristic Functions
- Chemistry
- Chomsky
- Classification
- Cognition
- Cognitive Science
- Coherence
- Coherentism
- Combinator Calculus
- Combinatorics
- Combinatory Logic
- Comments Elsewhere
- Commerce
- Communication
- Community
- Community of Inquiry
- Community of Interpretation
- Complementarity
- Complexity
- Compositionality
- Comprehension
- Computability
- Computation
- Computational Complexity
- Computer Programming
- Computer Science
- Computing
- Concept Formation
- Conceptual Barriers
- Conceptual Graphs
- Conceptual Integration
- Concordance
- Congruence
- Conjecture
- Connotation
- Consciousness
- Consensus
- Constraint
- Constraint Satisfaction Problems
- Construct Validity
- Contingency
- Continua
- Continuity
- Control
- Control Systems
- Control Theory
- Convergence
- Correspondence
- Cosmogony
- Critical Thinking
- Curry–Howard Isomorphism
- Cybernetics
- Data Structures
- Deborah G. Mayo
- Deduction
- Definition
- Deja Vu
- Democracy
- Denotation
- Descartes
- Descriptive Science
- Determination
- Determinism
- Dewey
- Diagrammatic Reasoning
- Diagrams
- Dialogue
- Differential Analytic Turing Automata
- Differential Calculus
- Differential Geometry
- Differential Logic
- Differential Propositions
- Dimensionality
- Discovery
- Discrete Dynamical Systems
- Discrete Dynamics
- Discrete Mathematics
- Discreteness
- Discretion
- Dispersion
- Diversity
- Doctrine of Individuals
- Doubt
- Drama
- Dualism
- Duality
- Duns Scotus
- Dyadic Relations
- Dyadicism
- Dynamical Systems
- Dynamics
- Economics
- Education
- Educational Systems Design
- Educational Technology
- Effective Description
- Ego
- Eleatic Stranger
- Enthymeme
- Entropy
- Epimenides
- Epistemology
- Equational Inference
- Error
- Error-Controlled Regulation
- Essentialism
- Eternal Return
- Eternity
- Ethics
- Euclid
- Euler
- Evil
- Evolution
- Existence
- Existential Choice
- Existentialism
- Expectation
- Experience
- Extension
- Fallibility
- Falsity
- Feedback
- Finite Means
- Finitude
- Fitness Landscapes
- Fixation of Belief
- Forest Primeval
- Form
- Formal Grammars
- Formal Language Theory
- Formal Languages
- Formal Systems
- Foundations of Mathematics
- Fourier Transforms
- Frankl Conjecture
- Frederik Stjernfelt
- Free Will
- Freedom
- Freud
- Functional Logic
- Fuzzy Logic
- Fuzzy Sets
- Gödel
- Gödel Numbers
- Generality
- Genericity
- Geometry
- Gettysburg Address
- Governance
- Grabitational Singularity
- Gradient Descent
- Grammar
- Graph Theory
- Group Theory
- Guest Post
- H.W. Gould
- Haecceity
- Harmonic Analysis
- Heap Problem
- Heraclitus
- Hermeneutics
- Higher Order Propositions
- Higher Order Sign Relations
- Hilbert
- Hill Climbing
- History of Mathematics
- History of Science
- Hologrammautomaton
- Homunculi
- Homunculomorphisms
- Humor
- Hypostatic Abstraction
- Hypothesis
- Hypothesis Formation
- Icon Index Symbol
- Iconicity
- Identity
- Ignorance
- Illusion
- Imagination
- In Memoriam
- Incommensurability
- Indication
- Indicator Functions
- Individuality
- Individuals
- Induction
- Inference
- Infinite Use
- Infinitesimals
- Infinity
- Information
- Information & Control
- Information = Comprehension × Extension
- Information Fusion
- Information Resistance
- Information Theory
- Inhibition
- Initiative
- Innate Idea
- Innate Ideas
- Inquiry
- Inquiry Driven Systems
- Inquiry Into Inquiry
- Inquiry Support Technology
- Inscription
- Instruction
- Integer Sequences
- Intelligent Systems
- Intelligent Systems Engineering
- Intelliscope
- Intension
- Intention
- Intentional Contexts
- Intentional Objects
- Intentionality
- Intentions
- Internal Models
- Interoperability
- Interpretation
- Interpretive Duality
- Interpretive Frameworks
- Intuition
- Invention
- Irving Anellis
- John Dewey
- John Venn
- Justice
- Kaina Stoicheia
- Kant
- Knowledge
- Knowledge Bases
- Knowledge Representation
- Lambda Calculus
- Lambda Point
- Law
- Law of Nature
- Laws of Form
- Learning
- Learning
- Learning Organizations
- Learning Society
- Learning Systems
- Learning Theory
- Leibniz
- Lewis Carroll
- Liar Paradox
- Likelihood
- Likely Story
- Likeness
- Limitation
- Linguistics
- Locke
- Logic
- Logic of Relatives
- Logic of Science
- Logical Atoms
- Logical Graphs
- Logical Influence
- Logical Matrices
- Logical Reflexion
- Lotfi Zadeh
- Lou Kauffman
- Machine Learning
- Madeleine
- Maieusis
- Manifolds
- Mantra
- Martin Gardner
- Mathematical Demonstration
- Mathematical Intuition
- Mathematical Logic
- Mathematical Models
- Mathematical Reasoning
- Mathematical Traps
- Mathematics
- Matrix Theory
- Matter
- Max Weber
- Maxim
- Maze
- Meaning
- Measurement
- Mechanization
- Meditation
- Medium = Message
- Memo
- Memoir
- Memorandum
- Memorial Day
- Memory
- Meno
- Mental Models
- Metabasis
- Metaphor
- Metaphysics
- Method
- Michael Harris
- Minimal Negation Operators
- Modality
- Model Theory
- Modus Ponens
- Molière
- Monadology
- Moneytheism
- Morpheus
- Morphism
- Mortality
- Motion
- Music
- Myth
- Mythematics
- Natural Intelligence
- Natural Law
- Neil Sloane
- Networks
- Neural Models
- Nietzsche
- Nominalism
- Normative Science
- Nostalgebra
- Nostalgia
- Number Theory
- Objective Frameworks
- Objectivism
- Objects Objectives Objectivity
- Observation
- Ockham
- Ockham's Razor
- Oedipus
- Ontology
- Open Access Research
- Operations Research
- Optimal Control
- Optimization
- Oracles
- Painted Cacti
- Paradigmata
- Paradigms
- Paradox
- Parmenides
- Passion
- Pattern Recognition
- Péter Frankl
- Pedagogy
- Peirce
- Peirce List
- Peirce's Categories
- Peirce's Law
- Perception
- Peter Woit
- Phenomenology
- Philosophy
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Mind
- Philosophy of Notation
- Philosophy of Science
- Photo
- Phrenology
- Physics
- Pigeonhole Principle
- Pivotal Variables
- Planck
- Planted Plane Trees
- Plato
- Plausibility
- Poem
- Poetry
- Politics
- Praeclarum Theorema
- Pragmata
- Pragmatic Cosmos
- Pragmatic Information
- Pragmatic Maxim
- Pragmatic Semiotic Information
- Pragmatics
- Pragmatism
- Preëstablished Harmony
- Predicate Calculus
- Prigogine
- Probability
- Probable Reasoning
- Problem Solving
- Process
- Process Thinking
- Programming
- Programming Languages
- Proof Theory
- Propositional Calculus
- Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems
- Propositional Logic
- Propositions
- Propositions As Types Analogy
- Proust
- Psychology
- Psychons
- Purpose
- Pythagoras
- Quanta
- Quantifiers
- Quantum Computing
- Quantum Mechanics
- Question
- Quotation
- Réseau
- Realism
- Reality
- Reasoning
- Reciprocity
- Recollection
- Recursion
- Redirect
- Reductionism
- References
- Reflection
- Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
- Regulation
- Reification
- Relation Theory
- Relational Algebra
- Relational Programming
- Relative Computability
- Relative Membership
- Relativity
- Relevance
- Repetition
- Representation
- Reproducibility
- Research Technology
- Resistance
- Resource
- Retroduction
- Reverie
- Revolt
- Rheme
- Rhetoric
- Rhythm
- Richard Kilvington
- Riemann
- Riffs and Rotes
- Rousseau
- Routinization
- Saunders Mac Lane
- Scholarship of Integration
- Science
- Scientific Attitude
- Scientific Inquiry
- Scientific Method
- Second Intentions
- Selfhood
- Semantics
- Semeiosis
- Semeiotic
- Semiosis
- Semiositis
- Semiotic Equivalence Relations
- Semiotic Information
- Semiotics
- Set Theory
- Shakespeare
- Sign Relational Manifolds
- Sign Relations
- Singularity
- Sisyphus
- Skiourosemiosis
- Social Compact
- Social Media
- Social Networks
- Society
- Sociology
- Socrates
- Sophismata
- Sophist
- Sorites
- Sources
- Spencer Brown
- Statistical Inference
- Statistics
- Structure
- Summum Bonum
- Surveys
- Survival
- Susan Awbrey
- Sustainability
- Syllogism
- Symbolism
- Symmetry
- Synechism
- Syntax
- Systems
- Systems of Interpretation
- Systems Theory
- Tabula Rasa
- Teaching
- Teaching
- Tenacity
- Teridentity
- Tertium Quid
- Testing
- The Big Picture
- Theatre
- Theodicy
- Theodore Parker
- Theorem Proving
- Theory
- Theory of Limits
- Thirdness
- Thomas Kuhn
- Thony Christie
- Timaeus
- Time
- Tolkien
- Tone Token Type
- Topology
- Translation
- Triadic Relation Irreducibility
- Triadic Relations
- Triadicity
- Truth
- Truth Tables
- Truth Theory
- Turing Machines
- Turing Test
- Two Cultures
- Type Theory
- Uncategorized
- Uncertainty
- Unity
- Universal Harmony
- Universals
- Use
- Use and Mention
- Utility
- Valor
- Valour
- Variety
- Venn Diagrams
- Verse
- Video
- Virtue
- Visualization
- Volition
- W. Ross Ashby
- Warren S. McCulloch
- Wilhelm von Humboldt
- William James
- Year In Review
- Zeno
- Zeroth Law Of Semiotics
- Zeroth Order Logic
Amphecks Animata Boolean Algebra Boolean Functions C.S. Peirce Cactus Graphs Category Theory Cybernetics Deduction Differential Logic Equational Inference Graph Theory Inquiry Inquiry Driven Systems Laws of Form Logic Logical Graphs Logic of Relatives Mathematics Minimal Negation Operators Painted Cacti Peirce Pragmatism Propositional Calculus Relation Theory Semiotics Sign Relations Spencer Brown Triadic Relations Visualization
Logic, Mathematics, Philosophy
Inquiry Driven Systems

Inquiry Driven Systems
Cybernetics

Cybernetics
Differential Logic

Differential Logic
Logical Graphs

Logical Graphs
Minimal Negation Operators

Minimal Negation Operators
Peirce Matters

Peirce Matters
Relation Theory

Relation Theory
Riffs & Rotes

Riffs & Rotes
Semeiotics

Semeiotics
Theme One

Theme One
Current Events
Fawkes News

Fawkes News
Meta
- Create account
- Log in
- Entries feed
- Comments feed
- WordPress.com

Selection from C.S. Peirce’s “Logic Of Relatives” (1870)

References

Resources

Share this:

Resources

Share this:

Resources

Share this:

Resources

Share this:

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives (concl.)

References

Resources

Share this:

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives (cont.)

References

Resources

Share this:

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives (cont.)

References

Resources

Share this:

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§2. Relatives

References

Resources

Share this:

References

Share this:

Chapter 3. The Logic of Relatives (cont.)

§1. Individual and Simple Terms (concl.)

References

Resources

Share this:

Elsewhere

Blogroll

Follow Blog via Email

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blog Stats

Categories

Logic, Mathematics, Philosophy

Current Events

Meta