Tag Archives: Nominalism

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 6

Posted on August 11, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List By way of orientation to the task at hand, we are investigating a type of slippage that occurs in the gap between natural language, with the natural assumptions it has evolved to take for granted, rightly or … Continue reading →

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

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 5

Posted on August 7, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List It may be a day or two before I can get back to the zeroth law of semiotics and how grasping it cures a strain of ills that language and some fashions of logic are heir to, … Continue reading →

Posted in Denotation, Epimenides, Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Peirce List, Pragmatics, Pragmatism, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 4

Posted on August 5, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Sungchul Ji General terms are terms like man, woman, child, etc., each of which applies to many individuals, in other words, has a general denotation or a plural extension.  Generally speaking, a general term is treated … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Denotation, Epimenides, Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatics, Pragmatism, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 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

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 1

Posted on February 27, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Helmut Raulien The divisor of relation signified by is a dyadic relation on the set of positive integers and thus may be understood as a subset of the cartesian product   It is an example of … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatism, Realism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • 3

Posted on February 18, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Here are two ways of looking at the divisibility relation, a dyadic relation of fundamental importance in number theory. Table 1 shows the first few ordered pairs of the relation on positive integers corresponding to the relative term, “divisor of”.  … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatism, Realism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • 2

Posted on February 17, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

What is the relationship between “logical relatives” and “mathematical relations”?  The word relative used as a noun in logic is short for relative term — as such it refers to an item of language used to denote a formal object. … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Dyadic Relations, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Nominalism, Peirce, Pragmatism, Realism, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments