Tag Archives: Higher Order Sign Relations

Higher Order Sign Relations • Discussion 2

Posted on December 23, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Ontolog Forum • Joseph Simpson Re: Relations, Types, Functions JA: The subject matters of relations, types, and functions enjoy a form of recursive involvement with one another which makes it difficult to know where to get on and where to … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Gödel Numbers, Higher Order Sign Relations, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Logic, Peirce, Quotation, Reflection, Reflective Interpretive Frameworks, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Higher Order Sign Relations • Discussion 1

Posted on December 4, 2019 by Jon Awbrey

Re: FB | Charles S. Peirce Society • John Corcoran Questions about the proper treatment of use and mention from the standpoint of Peirce’s theory of signs came up recently in discussions on Facebook.  In pragmatic semiotics the trade‑off between … Continue reading →

Posted in Arithmetization, C.S. Peirce, Gödel Numbers, Higher Order Sign Relations, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Logic, Mathematics, Quotation, Reflection, Reflective Interpretive Frameworks, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Use and Mention, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

Higher Order Sign Relations • 1

Posted on August 1, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

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 … Continue reading →

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