To Avoid The Abyss

We have come to the edge of a moral abyss.

The abyss is telling us — “Stop.  Do not go this way.  Turn and go another way.”

A simple message.  Easy to obey.  But there may be other forces in play.

Is there too much whirring in our ears and heads to hear what the abyss is saying?  Are we going too fast, have too much momentum in a single direction to stop in time?  Are there people pushing us toward the abyss? — they call themselves leaders, but they walk behind.  Are there people pulling us toward the abyss? — they call themselves leaders, the already lost.

It will take each individual stopping and asking, “Who are the real enemies of freedom?  Who are the real enemies of truth?”  It will take each individual stopping and saying, “No, I will not go this way.  I will not teach the lie anymore.”

That is what it will take …

Posted in Anthem, Ethics, Governance, The Big Picture | Tagged , , , | 13 Comments

When It Reigns It Poors

Corporate-owned financial institutions pull off the most massive theft of the Common Wealth in American history and the corporate-owned media wring their hands about the “economic downturn”. We are told it’s time for “austerity measures” and “shared sacrifice” — all the while we stare a tidal wave of slush funds in the face that corporate lords have been stashing away for a reigny day, the day they finally bust us down to the estate of serfs and guildless peons once again.

Neo-cons, Neo-libs, and their Neo-speak economists — their snoots so full of theory they long ago lost the sense it takes to “follow the money” no matter how bad it stinks up their audit trails — divert the People with tales of the Invisible Hand while light fingers lift the loot in broad daylight from under their noses. “It’s an Act of God, a natural disaster. No one mugged thee, Nemo did it.”

But the game is up. We see it now. Irresponsibility is its name, it’s out of control, it’s past the tipping point, and it just keeps howling for more, more, more.

Posted in Commerce, Economics, Governance, Politics, The Big Picture | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry • 1

Here are several excursions I made into the subjects of Abduction, Deduction, Induction, and Analogy, comparing Peirce’s first formulations with those in Aristotle and focusing on the ways those patterns of inference fit into the Cycle of Inquiry.  Much of this work was done within the context of an AI/Systems Engineering project to develop computational tools for scientific inquiry, seeking applications to bridge the gap between qualitative and quantitative research methodologies.

cc: Peirce List (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

Posted in Abduction, Analogy, Aristotle, Artificial Intelligence, C.S. Peirce, Deduction, Induction, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Intelligent Systems Engineering, Logic, Mental Models, Peirce, Scientific Method, Semiotics, Systems | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

i write in order to remember myself

just so i don’t forget

Posted in Memo, Memoir, Memorandum | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

C.S. Peirce • New Elements (Καινὰ Στοιχεῖα) • Comment 1

Re: Peirce List • (1)(2)
Re: C.S. Peirce • New Elements (Καινὰ Στοιχεῖα) • 1

Interest in the reading of Peirce’s “New Elements” appears to be flagging of late, so I thought I might spice things up by playing the Devil’s Advocate on a series of critical points.  I’ll draw these points both from Peirce’s text and from the various commentaries on it.  Heaven knows I’m not accustomed to finding fault with the Peircean canon — by way of reminding myself to mount a spirited opposition, then, I’ll mark the specific objections I make in this role with the tag DA.

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Foundations of Mathematics, Logic, Mathematics, Peirce, Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

C.S. Peirce • New Elements (Καινὰ Στοιχεῖα) • 1

Selections from C.S. Peirce, “New Elements (Καινὰ Στοιχεῖα)”

Editors’ Headnote from The Essential Peirce, Volume 2

MS 517.  [First published in NEM 4:235–63.  This document was most probably written in early 1904, as a preface to an intended book on the foundations of mathematics.]  Peirce begins with a discussion of “the Euclidean style” he planned to follow in his book.  Euclid’s Elements presuppose an understanding of the logical structure of mathematics (geometry) that Peirce, in his “New Elements,” wants to explicate.  Having recently concluded that the scope of logic should be extended to include all of semiotics, Peirce now wants to work out the semiotic principles that he hopes will shed light on the most abstract science.  Building on the work in his 1903 “Syllabus,” Peirce deepens his semiotic theory by linking it with the mathematical conceptions of “degrees of degeneracy.”  Symbols are taken to be non-degenerate, genuine, signs, while indices are signs degenerate in the first degree and icons are degenerate in the second degree.  Symbols must always involve both indices and icons, and indices must always involve icons.  Peirce limits his attention to this trichotomy but carries his discussion deeply into epistemology and metaphysics, making such arresting claims as that “representations have power to cause real facts” and that “there can be no reality which has not the life of a symbol.”  Max Fisch described this paper as Peirce’s “best statement so far of his general theory of signs.”  (EP 2, 300).

Peirce Edition Project (eds., 1998), The Essential Peirce, Selected Philosophical Writings, Volume 2 (1893–1913), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN.  Cited as EP 2.

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Foundations of Mathematics, Logic, Mathematics, Peirce, Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Light in the Clearing

I will keep returning to my core values.
I will keep speaking from the center of my experience.

Disorder all around me? — What does it matter?

As long as there is order in my mind,
As long as my mind is in order,
I will start from there.

Jon Awbrey
7 August 2012

Posted in Anthem, Verse | Tagged , | 2 Comments

Higher Order Sign Relations • 1

When interpreters reflect on their use of signs they require an appropriate technical language in which to pursue their reflections.  They need signs referring to sign relations, signs referring to elements and components of sign relations, and signs referring to properties and classes of sign relations.  The orders of signs developing as reflection evolves can be organized under the heading of “higher order signs” and the reflective sign relations involving them can be referred to as “higher order sign relations”.

I’ve been working apace to format my old dissertation proposal on Inquiry Driven Systems for the web but I was reminded of this part when the subject of “signs about signs” came up recently on the Peirce List.

cc: Conceptual GraphsCyberneticsLaws of FormOntolog Forum
cc: FB | Inquiry Driven SystemsStructural ModelingSystems Science

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Higher Order Sign Relations, Inquiry, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Logic, Mathematics, Recursion, Reflection, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Καινὰ Στοιχεῖα


Angelina Suite, Duggan Place, Stratford, Ontario, 15 July 2012, 5:24 am

Angelina Suite • Duggan Place • Stratford • Ontario • 15 July 2012 • 5:24 am

Posted in Photo | Tagged | Leave a comment

Notes on the Foundations of Mathematics • 2

Selections from R.L. Wilder, Introduction to the Foundations of Mathematics

I.   The Axiomatic Method

Since the axiomatic method as it is now understood and practiced by mathematicians is the result of a long evolution in human thought, we shall precede our discussion of it by a brief description of some older uses of the term axiom.  The modern usage of the term represents a high degree of maturity, and a better understanding of it may be achieved by some acquaintance with the course of its evolution.

1.   Evolution of the Method

If the reader has at hand a copy of an elementary plane geometry, of a type frequently used in high schools, he may find two groupings of fundamental assumptions, one entitled “Axioms,” the other entitled “Postulates.”  The intent of this grouping may be explained by such accompanying remarks as:  “An axiom is a self-evident truth.”  “A postulate is a geometrical fact so simple and obvious that its validity may be assumed.”  The “axioms” themselves may contain such statements as:  “The whole is greater than any of its parts.”  “The whole is the sum of its parts.”  “Things equal to the same thing are equal to one another.”  “Equals added to equals yield equals.”  It will be noted that such geometric terms as “point” or “line” do not occur in these statements;  in some sense the axioms are intended to transcend geometry — to be “universal truths.”  In contrast, the “postulates” probably contain such statements as:  “Through two distinct points one and only one straight line can be drawn.”  “A line can be extended indefinitely.”  “If L is a line and P is a point not on L, then through P there can be drawn one and only one line parallel to L.”  (Some so-called “definitions” of terms usually precede these statements.)

This grouping into “axioms” and “postulates” has its roots in antiquity.  Thus we find in Aristotle (384–321 B.C.) the following viewpoint: †

“Every demonstrative science must start from indemonstrable principles;  otherwise, the steps of demonstration would be endless.  Of these indemonstrable principles some are (a) common to all sciences, others are (b) particular, or peculiar to the particular science;  (a) the common principles are the axioms, most commonly illustrated by the axiom that, if equals be subtracted from equals, the remainders are equal.  In (b) we have first the genus or subject-matter, the existence of which must be assumed.”

† As summarized by T.L. Heath, [The Thirteen Books of Euclid’s Elements, I, 119, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1908].  The reader is referred to this book for citations from Aristotle, Proclus, et al.

Reference

  • Wilder, Raymond L. (1952), Introduction to the Foundations of Mathematics, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Posted in C.S. Peirce, Foundations of Mathematics, Kaina Stoicheia, Logic, Mathematics, Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment