Tag Archives: Triadic Relations

Triadic Relation Irreducibility • 1

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

Triadic Relations, Intentions, Fuzzy Subsets • Discussion 3

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Gary Moore • Stefan Berwing I intend to get back to this subject as soon as possible but the dire political situation in my home state is once again eating up a lot of my … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Sets, Intentional Contexts, Intentional Objects, Intentionality, Intentions, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Lotfi Zadeh, Mathematics, Peirce, Probability, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Triadic Relations, Intentions, Fuzzy Subsets • Discussion 2

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Stefan Berwing Let us put fuzzy sets to one side for the moment and take up the matter of belief you raised, as I believe that connection is very apt. As it happens, there was … Continue reading →

Posted in Belief, Bertrand Russell, C.S. Peirce, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Sets, Intentional Contexts, Intentional Objects, Intentionality, Intentions, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Lotfi Zadeh, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Triadic Relations, Intentions, Fuzzy Subsets : 3

There is at present an extensive literature on fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic.  I got another brush with the world of fuzzy in the 1990s when I returned to grad school in a systems engineering program, partly because my adviser … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Sets, Intentional Contexts, Intentional Objects, Intentionality, Intentions, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Lotfi Zadeh, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Triadic Relations, Intentions, Fuzzy Subsets : 2

We imagine all the things we might want to talk about in a given discussion as collected together in a set X called a universe of discourse.  (In probabilistic or statistical work it might be called a sample space.) By … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Sets, Intentional Contexts, Intentional Objects, Intentionality, Intentions, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Lotfi Zadeh, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Triadic Relations, Intentions, Fuzzy Subsets • Discussion 1

Re: Peirce List Discussion • Stefan Berwing Frequencies, histograms, and probabilities are one way to think about degrees of membership in a fuzzy subset, but there are cautions to be observed in doing that. Consider the following triadic relations: x … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Sets, Intentional Contexts, Intentional Objects, Intentionality, Intentions, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Lotfi Zadeh, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Triadic Relations, Intentions, Fuzzy Subsets • 1

Re: Foundations Of Math Discussion • Lotfi Zadeh Way back during my first foundational crisis (1967–1972), I had been willing to consider almost any alternatives to the usual set theories, so I can remember looking at early accounts of fuzzy … Continue reading →

Posted in C.S. Peirce, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Sets, Intentional Contexts, Intentional Objects, Intentionality, Intentions, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Lotfi Zadeh, Mathematics, Peirce, Relation Theory, Semiotics, Triadic Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Sign Relational Manifolds • 5

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

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

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