Tag Archives: Mathematics

Peirce’s Categories • 1

Posted on October 30, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Jeffrey Brian Downard Just from my experience, the best first approach to questions of firstness, secondness, thirdness, and so on is to regard k-ness as the property that all k-adic relations possess in common.  There is … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstraction, C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Dimensionality, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce's Categories, Phenomenology, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments

What Makes An Object? • 2

Posted on October 26, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussison • (1) • (2) Visual metaphors and perceptual analogies can be instructive — they make for most of my personal favorites — but in logic, mathematics, and science our interest extends through the abductive spectrum, from … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Interpretation, Interpretive Frameworks, Intuition, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Manifolds, Mathematics, Objective Frameworks, Peirce, Peirce List, Physics, Pragmata, Pragmatism, Process, Process Thinking, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

What Makes An Object? • 1

Posted on October 25, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Gary Fuhrman • Seeing Things What makes an object is a perennial question. I can remember my physics professors bringing it up in a really big way when I was still just a freshman in college.  They always cautioned … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Interpretation, Interpretive Frameworks, Intuition, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Manifolds, Mathematics, Objective Frameworks, Peirce, Peirce List, Physics, Pragmata, Pragmatism, Process, Process Thinking, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

You Say “Réseau” • I Say “Rousseau” • 3

Posted on September 21, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • My Réseau • Networks in Action in French Economics Readers of Peirce know the concept of community is integral to his treatment of inquiry, interpretation, knowledge, reality, and truth.  The following statement is a nice résumé … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Community, Community of Inquiry, Community of Interpretation, Inquiry, Manifolds, Mathematics, Michael Harris, Networks, Réseau, Reality, Rousseau, Semiotics, Social Compact, Social Networks, Sociology | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

You Say “Réseau” • I Say “Rousseau” • 2

Posted on September 20, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • My Réseau • Networks in Action in French Economics No true Peircean could fail to be reminded of the following statement whenever the subjects of community or reality come up. The real, then, is that which, … Continue reading →

Posted in Community, Community of Inquiry, Community of Interpretation, Inquiry, Manifolds, Mathematics, Michael Harris, Networks, Peirce, Reality, Rousseau, Semiotics, Social Compact, Social Networks, Society | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

You Say “Réseau” • I Say “Rousseau” • 1

Posted on September 18, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • My Réseau • Networks in Action in French Economics The above two posts by Michael Harris sparked a series of reflections that I have yet to reign in fully but I thought I might pause a … Continue reading →

Posted in Community, Community of Inquiry, Community of Interpretation, Inquiry, Manifolds, Mathematics, Michael Harris, Networks, Peirce, Reality, Rousseau, Semiotics, Social Compact, Social Networks, Society | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Semiositis • 1

Posted on July 10, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Cathy O’Neil • Profit as Proxy for Value Re: Michael Harris • Xenomoney There is a deep and pervasive analogy between systems of commerce and systems of communication, turning on their near-universal use of symbola (images, media, proxies, signs, … Continue reading →

Posted in Analogy, C.S. Peirce, Cathy O'Neil, Commerce, Communication, Mathematics, Michael Harris, Pragmatics, Semantics, Semiosis, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Systems Theory, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 12

Posted on July 7, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Helmut Raulien Definitions and examples for relation composition and the two most commonly arising types of relation reduction can be found in the following articles. Relation Composition Relation Reduction A previous post on this thread gives … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Control, Cybernetics, Dyadic Relations, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Systems Theory, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 11

Posted on July 6, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Helmut Raulien Cf: Relation Reduction • Examples of Projectively Reducible Relations I constructed the “Ann and Bob” examples of sign relations back at the beginning of my Systems Engineering program when I had to explain how … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Control, Cybernetics, Dyadic Relations, Information, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Systems Theory, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Inquiry, Signs, Relations • 1

Posted on July 5, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Michael Harris • A Non-Logical Cognitive Phenomenon Human spontaneous non-demonstrative inference is not, overall, a logical process.  Hypothesis formation involves the use of deductive rules, but is not totally governed by them;  hypothesis confirmation is a non-logical cognitive phenomenon:  … Continue reading →

Posted in Abduction, Action, Analogy, C.S. Peirce, Cognition, Cognitive Science, Communication, Deduction, Foundations of Mathematics, Induction, Information, Information Theory, Inquiry, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Interpretation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logic of Science, Mathematics, Michael Harris, Peirce, Philosophy, Philosophy of Mathematics, Philosophy of Science, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Relevance, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment