Tag Archives: Peirce List

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

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

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 7

Posted on August 18, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List I still have in mind trying to show how the principle I dubbed the Zeroth Law Of Semiotics can help us see what is really going on with a number of old puzzles like the Liar Paradox, … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Denotation, Epimenides, Extension, Liar Paradox, Logic, Nominalism, Peirce, Peirce List, Pragmatics, Pragmatism, Rhetoric, Semantics, Semiositis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Syntax, Zeroth Law Of Semiotics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 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

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 10

Posted on July 2, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Helmut Raulien The facts about relational reducibility are relatively easy to understand and I included links to relevant discussions in my earlier survey of relation theory. The following article discusses relational reducibility and irreducibility in … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Combinatorics, Dyadic Relations, Graph Theory, Group Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Tertium Quid, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 9

Posted on July 2, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Jeffrey Brian Downard In viewing the structures of relation spaces, even the smallest dyadic cases we’ve been exploring so far, no one need feel nonplussed at the lack of obviousness in this domain.  Anyone who … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Combinatorics, Dyadic Relations, Graph Theory, Group Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Tertium Quid, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 8

Posted on June 30, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Jeffrey Brian Downard In discussing the “combinatorial explosion” of dyadic relations that takes off in passing from a universe of two elements to a universe of three elements, I made the following observation: Looking back … Continue reading →

Posted in Combinatorics, Graph Theory, Group Theory, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Tertium Quid, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 7

Posted on June 28, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Jim Willgoose Here is the series of blog posts on Chapter 3 (The Logic of Relatives) from Peirce’s 1880 “Algebra of Logic” up to the point where I left off on May Day. Preliminaries Selections … Continue reading →

Posted in Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Peirce List, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Tertium Quid, Thirdness, Triadic Relations, Triadicity | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

Relations & Their Relatives • Discussion 6

Posted on June 19, 2015 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Helmut Raulien In discussing Peirce’s concept of a triadic sign relation as existing among objects, signs, and interpretant signs the question arises whether any of the classes so related are classes by themselves, that is, … Continue reading →

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