Tag Archives: Information = Comprehension × Extension

Definition and Determination • 11

Posted on April 4, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List (1) (2) Re: Gary Fuhrman (1) (2) Re: Jeffrey Downard (1) (2) The subject of determination comes up from time to time.  Here is a link to an assortment of excerpts I collected when I was first … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Constraint, Definition, Determination, Extension, Form, Indication, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Peirce, Semiotics, Structure | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 3

Posted on August 4, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Tom Wyrick Nominalism takes its name from the idea that “generals are only names” and it goes by the maxims “Do not take a general name for the name of a general” and “Do not multiply entities … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Denotation, Extension, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatics, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 2

Posted on July 31, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Edwina Taborsky My old avatar 0* (Zero-Aster) does incline to laconic verses but I hope to address a class of concrete applications which will serve to unpack their sense. The main thing I wish to communicate … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Denotation, Extension, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatics, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 1

Posted on July 31, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

New discussions of the so-called “Liar Paradox” have broken out at several places on the web in recent weeks, just to mention a couple of cases: Foundations Of Mathematics (FOM) • The Liar Revenge Gödel’s Lost Letter and P=NP • … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Denotation, Extension, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatics, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics

Posted on July 30, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Meaning is a privilege not a right. Not all pictures depict. Not all signs denote. Never confuse a property of a sign, just for instance, existence, with a sign of a property, for instance, existence. Taking a property of a … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Denotation, Extension, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatics, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Survey of Semiotic Theory Of Information • 1

Posted on May 17, 2015 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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mathematical Demonstration and the Doctrine of Individuals • 2

Posted on February 23, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Selection from C.S. Peirce’s “Logic Of Relatives” (1870) In reference to the doctrine of individuals, two distinctions should be borne in mind.  The logical atom, or term not capable of logical division, must be one of which every predicate may … Continue reading →

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 , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

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.  … Continue reading →

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 , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Definition and Determination • 10

Posted on October 7, 2013 by Jon Awbrey

The moment, then, that we pass from nothing and the vacuity of being to any content or sphere, we come at once to a composite content and sphere.  In fact, extension and comprehension — like space and time — are … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Constraint, Definition, Determination, Extension, Form, Indication, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Peirce, Semiotics, Sources | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

C.S. Peirce : Information = Comprehension × Extension

Posted on May 8, 2013 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton and K.W. Regan • A Most Perplexing Mystery The inverse relationship between symmetry and diversity — that we see for example in the lattice-inverting map of a Galois correspondence — is a variation on an old theme … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Diversity, Extension, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Reciprocity, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Symmetry, Variety | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments