Tag Archives: Mathematics

Problems In Philosophy • 4

Posted on February 9, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton and K.W. Regan • Did Euclid Really Mean ‘Random’? These are the forms of time, which imitates eternity and revolves according to a law of number. Plato • Timaeus • 38 A Benjamin Jowett (trans.) It is … Continue reading →

Posted in Aristotle, Computation, Computer Science, Euclid, Genericity, Geometry, Iconicity, Likelihood, Likely Story, Likeness, Mathematics, Number Theory, Philosophy, Philosophy of Mathematics, Plato, Probability, Socrates | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Problems In Philosophy • 3

Posted on February 8, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.D. Mounce Making reality our friend is necessary to survival and finding good descriptions of reality is the better part of doing that, so I don’t imagine we have any less interest in truth than the Ancients.  From what … Continue reading →

Posted in Aesthetics, Computation, Computer Science, Ethics, Heap Problem, Logic, Mathematics, Model Theory, Normative Science, Paradox, Peirce, Philosophy, Pragmatism, Problem Solving, Proof Theory, Sorites | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Riffs and Rotes • 3

Posted on February 3, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton • Failure Of Unique Factorization My favorite question in this realm is how much of the linear ordering of the natural numbers is purely combinatorial, where we eliminate all the structure that isn’t purely combinatorial via the … Continue reading →

Posted in Algebra, Combinatorics, Graph Theory, Group Theory, Logic, Mathematics, Number Theory, Riffs and Rotes | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 17

Posted on January 4, 2016 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • HR We have been considering special properties that a dyadic relation may have, in particular, the following two symmetry properties. A dyadic relation is symmetric if being in implies that is in A dyadic relation is … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Considerate Reason • 2

Posted on December 29, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton • Why Is Discrete Math Hard To Teach? The Liberal Arts trivium of Grammar, Logic, Rhetoric received a latter day echo in the Unified Science trivium of Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatics, which was in turn the way Charles Morris … Continue reading →

Posted in Argument, C.S. Peirce, Computer Programming, Discrete Mathematics, Education, Educational Systems Design, Grammar, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Interpretation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Pragmatics, Relation Theory, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Considerate Reason • 1

Posted on December 28, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton • Why Is Discrete Math Hard To Teach? Rhetoric deals with forms of argument that consider the interpreter.  As considerate reason, it is involved in the style of training the Greeks dubbed education, “leading out”, and it … Continue reading →

Posted in Argument, C.S. Peirce, Computer Programming, Discrete Mathematics, Education, Educational Systems Design, Grammar, Inquiry, Inquiry Driven Systems, Interpretation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Pragmatics, Relation Theory, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 16

Posted on December 22, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • HR I would not want the dyadic case to detain us too long, as often happens when we frame a simple example for the purpose of illustration and then fail to rise beyond it. I … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 15

Posted on December 12, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • HR The immediate task is to get clear about the critical relationship between relations as sets and elementary relations as elements of those sets.  What’s at stake is understanding the extensional aspect of relations.  Beyond … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 14

Posted on December 10, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • GF • JBD • HR I think a few people are making this harder than it needs to be. Let’s put aside potential subtleties about elementary vs. individual vs. infinitesimal relatives and simply use “elementary … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 13

Posted on December 8, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussions • (1) • (2) First off, we need to be clear about the difference between objects and signs: Relations are formal objects of discussion and thought while relative terms are signs employed to denote relations.  (The … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments