Tag Archives: Sign Relations

C.S. Peirce : Information = Comprehension × Extension

Posted on May 8, 2013 by Jon Awbrey

Re: R.J. Lipton and K.W. Regan • A Most Perplexing Mystery The inverse relationship between symmetry and diversity — that we see for example in the lattice-inverting map of a Galois correspondence — is a variation on an old theme … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Comprehension, Diversity, Extension, Information, Information = Comprehension × Extension, Inquiry, Intension, Logic, Logic of Science, Peirce, Reciprocity, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Symmetry, Variety | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

Triadic Relation Irreducibility • 2

Posted on January 18, 2013 by Jon Awbrey

Re: Peirce List • Matt Faunce • Jon Awbrey • Jon Awbrey Though my present object has more to do with the logical and mathematical aspects of triadic relations than it does with their psychological embodiments, the following exchange on … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Teridentity, Thirdness, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Triadic Relation Irreducibility • 1

Posted on January 17, 2013 by Jon Awbrey

The core insight of Peirce’s conceptual system is the recognition that triadic relations are sui generis, constituting a class by themselves.  Understanding the properties of triadic relations and the consequences of their irreducibility is critical to understanding Peirce’s thought and work.  … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Category Theory, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Teridentity, Thirdness, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Sign Relational Manifolds • 5

Posted on November 1, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

Let me try to say in intuitive terms what I think is really going on here. The problem we face is as old as the problem of other minds, or intersubjectivity, or even commensurability, and it naturally involves a whole … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Differential Geometry, Differential Logic, Geometry, Interoperability, Logic, Manifolds, Mathematics, Riemann, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sign Relational Manifolds • 4

Posted on October 30, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

Another set of notes I found on this theme strikes me as getting to the point more quickly and though they read a little rough in places I think it may be worth the effort to fill out their general … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Differential Geometry, Differential Logic, Geometry, Interoperability, Logic, Manifolds, Mathematics, Riemann, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Sign Relational Manifolds • 3

Posted on October 23, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

I’m not sure when it was I first noticed the relationship between manifolds and semiotics but I distinctly recall the passage in Serge Lang’s Differential and Riemannian Manifolds which brought the triadic character of tangent vectors into high relief.  I … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Differential Geometry, Differential Logic, Geometry, Intentionality, Logic, Manifolds, Mathematics, Riemann, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sign Relational Manifolds • 2

Posted on October 22, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

A sense of how manifolds are applied in practice may be gleaned from the set of excerpts linked below, from Doolin and Martin (1990), Introduction to Differential Geometry for Engineers, which I used in discussing differentiable manifolds with other participants … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Differential Geometry, Differential Logic, Geometry, Interoperability, Logic, Manifolds, Mathematics, Riemann, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sign Relational Manifolds • 1

Posted on October 22, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

Riemann’s concept of a manifold, especially as later developed, bears a close relationship to Peirce’s concept of a sign relation. I will have to wait for my present train of thought to stop at a station before I can hop … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Cybernetics, Differential Geometry, Differential Logic, Geometry, Interoperability, Logic, Manifolds, Mathematics, Riemann, Semiotics, Sign Relational Manifolds, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Visualization | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Higher Order Sign Relations • 1

Posted on August 1, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

When interpreters reflect on their use of signs they require an appropriate technical language in which to pursue their reflections.  They need signs referring to sign relations, signs referring to elements and components of sign relations, and signs referring to … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Higher Order Sign Relations, Inquiry, Inquiry Into Inquiry, Logic, Mathematics, Recursion, Reflection, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Type Theory | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Peircean Semiotics and Triadic Sign Relations • 2

Posted on June 27, 2012 by Jon Awbrey

When I returned to graduate school for the third time around, this time in systems engineering, I had in mind integrating my long‑standing projects investigating the dynamics of information, inquiry, learning, and reasoning, viewing each as a process whose trajectory evolves … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Sign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments