Tag Archives: Logical Graphs

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.5 We have sufficiently covered the application of the comma functor to absolute terms, so let us return to where we were in working our way through CP 3.73 and see whether we can … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.4 From now on the forms of analysis exemplified in the last set of Figures and Tables will serve as a convenient bridge between the logic of relative terms and the mathematics of … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.3 We have been using several styles of picture to illustrate relative terms and the relations they denote.  Let’s now examine the relationships which exist among the variety of visual schemes.  Two examples … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.2 To say a relative term “imparts a relation” is to say it conveys information about the space of tuples in a cartesian product, that is, it determines a particular subset of that … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 10.1 What Peirce is attempting to do at CP 3.75 is absolutely amazing.  I did not run across anything on a par with it again until the mid 1980s when I began studying the … Continue reading →

We continue with §3. Application of the Algebraic Signs to Logic. Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Selection 10 The Signs for Multiplication (cont.) The sum generally denotes no logical term.  But may be considered as denoting some two ’s.  … Continue reading →

We continue with §3. Application of the Algebraic Signs to Logic. Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Selection 9 The Signs for Multiplication (cont.) It is obvious that multiplication into a multiplicand indicated by a comma is commutative,1 that is, … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 8.4 I continue with my commentary on CP 3.73, developing the Othello example as a way of illustrating Peirce’s formalism. To familiarize ourselves with the forms of calculation available in Peirce’s notation, let us … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 8.3 I continue with my commentary on CP 3.73, developing the Othello example as a way of illustrating Peirce’s formalism. It is critically important to distinguish a relation from a relative term. The relation … Continue reading →

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Comment 8.2 I continue with my commentary on CP 3.73, developing the Othello example as a way of illustrating Peirce’s formalism. In the development of the story so far, we have a universe of discourse … Continue reading →