Cf: Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relation Theory • Discussion 6
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2022/03/01/sign-relations-triadic-relations-r…
Re: FB | Charles S. Peirce Society
https://www.facebook.com/groups/peircesociety/posts/2551077815028195/
::: Alain Létourneau
https://www.facebook.com/groups/peircesociety/posts/2551077815028195?commen…
All,
Alain Létourneau asks if I have any thoughts
on Peirce's Rhetoric. I venture the following.
Classically speaking, rhetoric (as distinguished from dialectic)
treats forms of argument which “consider the audience” — which
take the condition of the addressee into account. But that is
just what Peirce's semiotic does in extending our theories of
signs from dyadic to triadic sign relations.
We often begin our approach to Peirce's semiotics by saying he puts the
interpreter back into the relation of signs to their objects. But even
Aristotle had already done that much. Peirce's innovation was to apply
the pragmatic maxim, clarifying the characters of interpreters in terms
of their effects — their interpretants — in the flow of semiosis.
Some reading —
Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (1995),
“Interpretation as Action • The Risk of Inquiry”,
Inquiry : Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 15(1), 40–52.
https://www.academia.edu/57812482/Interpretation_as_Action_The_Risk_of_Inqu…
Regards,
Jon
Cf: Functional Logic • Inquiry and Analogy • 9
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2022/05/02/functional-logic-inquiry-and-anal…
Inquiry and Analogy • Dewey’s “Sign of Rain” • An Example of Inquiry
https://oeis.org/wiki/Functional_Logic_%E2%80%A2_Inquiry_and_Analogy#Dewey_…
Inquiry and Inference
https://oeis.org/wiki/Functional_Logic_%E2%80%A2_Inquiry_and_Analogy#Dewey_…
If we follow Dewey’s “Sign of Rain” example far enough to consider
the import of thought for action, we realize the subsequent conduct
of the interpreter, progressing up through the natural conclusion of
the episode — the quickening steps, seeking shelter in time to escape
the rain — all those acts form a series of further interpretants,
contingent on the active causes of the individual, for the originally
recognized signs of rain and the first impressions of the actual case.
Just as critical reflection develops the associated and alternative
signs which gather about an idea, pragmatic interpretation explores
the consequential and contrasting actions which give effective and
testable meaning to a person’s belief in it.
Figure 10 charts the progress of inquiry in Dewey’s Sign of Rain example
according to the stages of reasoning identified by Peirce, focusing on
the compound or mixed form of inference formed by the first two steps.
Figure 10. Cycle of Inquiry
https://inquiryintoinquiry.files.wordpress.com/2022/04/cycle-of-inquiry-gra…
Step 1 is Abductive,
abstracting a Case from the consideration of a Fact and a Rule.
• Fact : C ⇒ A, In the Current situation the Air is cool.
• Rule : B ⇒ A, Just Before it rains, the Air is cool.
• Case : C ⇒ B, The Current situation is just Before it rains.
Step 2 is Deductive,
admitting the Case to another Rule and arriving at a novel Fact.
• Case : C ⇒ B, The Current situation is just Before it rains.
• Rule : B ⇒ D, Just Before it rains, a Dark cloud will appear.
• Fact : C ⇒ D, In the Current situation, a Dark cloud will appear.
What precedes is nowhere near a complete analysis of Dewey’s example,
even so far as it might be carried out within the constraints of the
syllogistic framework, and it covers only the first two steps of the
inquiry process, but perhaps it will do for a start.
Regards,
Jon
There is a movement afoot to develop GQL as a kind of SQL for graphs. It's
just starting up, and I'm afraid that they may create YAK (Yet Another
Kluge). But since they want to use SQL conventions, there is a possibility
for making it compatible with DOL. If they do that, it could be a winner.
Otherwise, it could be a disaster.
The header of SQL is neutral: SELECT ... WHERE /* A statement in some
version of logic */
My recommendation is to base the WHERE-clause on DOL, which is an OMG
standard that can relate all the logics of the Semantic Web and all the
diagrams of Formal UML to Common Logic.
In March of 2020, I presented a talk at the Knowledge Graph conference,
for which I got the best presentation award. I updated it for a keynote
speech at the European Semantic Web Conference in June 2020. In both
talks, I emphasized the importance of interoperability and the use of DOL
for relating all the logics to one another via the freely available
software that was available. See http://jfsowa.com/talks/eswc.pdf .
In eswc.pdf, I emphasized the relationship of graph logics to Common Logic
and the OMG standard for DOL. I believe that approach could be used to
allow any logic supported by DOL as a candidate for the WHERE clause. That
would include a broad range of logics that are already being used plus any
new logics that could be mapped to and from graphs. As examples, I used
existential graphs and conceptual graphs. They are general enough to
include all the current knowledge graphs as proper subsets -- and both EGs
and CGs can support the same version of Common Logic as DOL they can also
be extended to support IKL -- but that would not be in the first version of
GQL.
Some people might complain that Common Logic is too powerful. But DOL
supports mappings among a very wide range of logics from the simplest up to
some very rich versions. A standard based on DOL would allow and encourage
implementers to choose any level of expressive power that any DOL logic
supports.
That would allow implementers to start small and add as much expressive
power as they find useful at any time they wish And it would show them an
open-ended growth path for the future.
Bottom Line: The standards organizations have a motto: "Standards should
be built on other standards." By building GQL on DOL, they would create a
bridge to all the logics of the Semantic Web, Formal UML, and SQL, which
supports a subset of first-order logic.
John
Cf: Survey of Differential Logic • 3
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2021/05/15/survey-of-differential-logic-3/
All,
Linked above is a Survey of blog and wiki posts on Differential Logic,
material I plan to develop toward a more compact and systematic account.
Note. One effect of the pandemic has been been to blot out my memory
of much work I blogged over the year and many group discussions I have
in mind as “recent” and “I’ll get back to it” actually occurred several
months ago. Thinking it will serve memory to recycle the more eddifying
currents of water under the bridge, here’s an update of my Survey page on
Differential Logic.
There's a lot of links, so I'll leave Readers on their own recognizance
to follow what they will from the linked blog post.
Regards,
Jon
Cf: Survey of Differential Logic • 3
https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2021/05/15/survey-of-differential-logic-3/
All,
Linked above is a Survey of blog and wiki posts on Differential Logic,
material I plan to develop toward a more compact and systematic account.
Note. One effect of the pandemic has been been to blot out my memory
of much work I blogged over the year and many group discussions I have
in mind as “recent” and “I’ll get back to it” actually occurred several
months ago. Thinking it will serve memory to recycle the more eddifying
currents of water under the bridge, here’s an update of my Survey page on
Differential Logic.
Regards,
Jon
