CG February 2022

cg@lists.iccs-conference.org

4 participants
5 discussions

by Jon Awbrey

Cf: Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Preliminaries https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2014/01/27/peirces-1870-logic-of-relatives-p… All, I need to return to my study of Peirce’s 1870 Logic of Relatives, and I thought it might be more pleasant to do that on my blog than to hermit away on the wiki where I last left off. Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives” • Part 1 =========================================== https://oeis.org/wiki/Peirce%27s_1870_Logic_Of_Relatives_%E2%80%A2_Part_1 Peirce’s text employs lower case letters for logical terms of general reference and upper case letters for logical terms of individual reference. General terms fall into types, namely, absolute terms, dyadic relative terms, and higher adic relative terms, and Peirce employs different typefaces to distinguish these. The following Tables indicate the typefaces used in the text below for Peirce’s examples of general terms. Table 1. Absolute Terms (Monadic Relatives) https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2021/11/peirces-1870-lor-e28… Table 2. Simple Relative Terms (Dyadic Relatives) https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2021/11/peirces-1870-lor-e28… Table 3. Conjugative Terms (Higher Adic Relatives) https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2021/11/peirces-1870-lor-e28… Individual terms are taken to denote individual entities falling under a general term. Peirce uses upper case Roman letters for individual terms, for example, the individual horses H, H′, H″ falling under the general term h for horse. The path to understanding Peirce’s system and its wider implications for logic can be smoothed by paraphrasing his notations in a variety of contemporary mathematical formalisms, while preserving the semantics as much as possible. Remaining faithful to Peirce’s orthography while adding parallel sets of stylistic conventions will, however, demand close attention to typography-in-context. Current style sheets for mathematical texts specify italics for mathematical variables, with upper case letters for sets and lower case letters for individuals. So we need to keep an eye out for the difference between the individual X of the genus x and the element x of the set X as we pass between the two styles of text. References ========== • Peirce, C.S. (1870), “Description of a Notation for the Logic of Relatives, Resulting from an Amplification of the Conceptions of Boole’s Calculus of Logic”, Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 9, 317–378, 26 January 1870. Reprinted, Collected Papers (CP 3.45–149), Chronological Edition (CE 2, 359–429). Online: • https://www.jstor.org/stable/25058006 • https://archive.org/details/jstor-25058006 • https://books.google.com/books?id=fFnWmf5oLaoC • Peirce, C.S., Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss (eds.), vols. 7–8, Arthur W. Burks (ed.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1931–1935, 1958. Cited as (CP volume.paragraph). • Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN, 1981–. Cited as (CE volume, page). Resources ========= • Peirce’s 1870 Logic of Relatives https://oeis.org/wiki/Peirce%27s_1870_Logic_Of_Relatives_%E2%80%A2_Overview Regards, Jon

2 years, 11 months

Some beginner questions about Prolog+CG

by Damien Guichard

Hello CG-ers, I am consider Prolog+CG as a tool to author an Interactive Fiction. Iam puzzled by the following Prolog+CG answer. Universal > Warrior, Weapon. Warrior > Jedi, Trooper, Machine, Sith. Weapon > Light_saber, Blaster_gun, Mega_laser. Machine = Battle_droid, Super_battle_droid, Cyclopedus. [Machine:Cyclopedus]- -armed_with->[Mega_laser], -protected_by1->[Machine:Super_battle_droid]-quantity->[Integer = 14], -protected_by2->[Machine:Battle_droid]- -quantity->[Integer = 10], -armed_with->[Blaster_gun]. When requested : ?- M -quantity-> I. The only answer is : {M=[Machine : Super_battle_droid], I=[Integer = 14]} Why {M=[Machine : Battle_droid], I=[Integer = 10]} is not another correct answer ? Regards, - damien

3 years, 1 month

What does Charles Sanders Peirce semiotic has to do with algebraic topology?

by garyzhubc＠gmail.com

What does Charles Sanders Peirce semiotic has to do with algebraic topology?

3 years, 1 month

Re: Differential Logic and Dynamic Systems

by Jon Awbrey

Cf: Differential Logic and Dynamic Systems • Discussion 7 http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2022/02/09/differential-logic-and-dynamic-sys… Re: Differential Logic and Dynamic Systems https://oeis.org/wiki/Differential_Logic_and_Dynamic_Systems_%E2%80%A2_Part… ::: Intentional Propositions https://oeis.org/wiki/Differential_Logic_and_Dynamic_Systems_%E2%80%A2_Part… Re: FB | Differential Logic https://www.facebook.com/DifferentialLogic/posts/2868375713219794 ::: Marius V. Constantin https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache/posts/10225410016490896?comment_id=1022… All, Marius Constantin asks about the logical value of intentions which are not carried out. <QUOTE MVC:> I have in my intention to give like, but I didn't. What is the value (logic) of this proposition? </QUOTE> Dear Marius, A difference between an expected state and an observed state is called a Surprise. A surprise calls for an explanation. A difference between an intended state and an observed state is called a Problem. A problem calls for a plan of action. There's more discussion in the following essay and section. Prospects for Inquiry Driven Systems https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey/Prospects_for_Inquiry_Driven_Systems Topos : Rudiments and Immediate Resources https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey/Prospects_for_Inquiry_Driven_Systems#… Resources ========= Survey of Differential Logic https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2021/05/15/survey-of-differential-logic-3/ Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/12/27/survey-of-inquiry-driven-systems-… Regards, Jon

3 years, 1 month

Re: [ontolog-forum] Is AI Metaphysics/Real Ontology?

by John F Sowa

Azamat, There is nothing to discuss. AI is an engineering discipline. It is not a branch of science or philosophy, but it can benefit from any results from any branch of philosophy or science. Since metaphysics is a branch of philosophy and AI is disjoint from philosophy, AI is disjoint from metaphysics. As for the ontology of AI, whenever AI engineers build something, an ontologist can assign it a place in any catalog of existing things. However, philosophy can be used at the metalevel to study and analyze any subject whatever. Since metaphysics is the metalevel analysis of any physical phenomena, it can be used to analyze any kind of physical system developed by AI engineers. In any subject whatever, many of the practitioners study, analyze, and comment on the methods and results of other practitioners. When they do that, they are doing metaphysics. C. S. Peirce (1887) was one of the first metaphysicians who wrote about logic machines and what they can do. Even earlier, Ada Lovelace wrote a metaphysical analysis of Babbage's machines. Both Peirce and Lovelace were metaphysicians who contributed to the metaphysics of AI. Alan Turing was another major contributor. Marvin Minsky and John McCarthy were early contributors to the metaphysics of AI, and they continued their analyses until they died in the early 21st c. Their methods of analysis and evaluation are just as useful today as they ever were. That's all there is to say about the classification. But there is a huge amount of work to do by metaphysicians of AI, who may also be engineers of AI. But it's important to keep the two subjects distinct. And the distinction between them was very clear to Peirce and Lovelace as it was Turing, Minsky, and McCarthy. There is no reason to blur that distinction. John ---------------------------------------- From: "Azamat Abdoullaev" <ontopaedia(a)gmail.com> Sent: Friday, February 4, 2022 6:17 AM To: "ontolog-forum" <ontolog-forum(a)googlegroups.com> Subject: [ontolog-forum] Is AI Metaphysics/Real Ontology? I thought it might be a lively topic to discuss. https://www.quora.com/Is-artificial-intelligence-metaphysics/answer/Kiryl-Pe rsianov?__nsrc__=4&__snid3__=32249760381#

3 years, 1 month

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

CG February 2022