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: Inquiry Into Inquiry • Discussion 6
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2023/04/30/inquiry-into-inquiry-discussion-6/
Re: Mathstodon • Nicole Rust
https://mathstodon.xyz/@NicoleCRust@neuromatch.social/110197230713039748
<QUOTE NR:>
Computations or Processes —
How do you think about the building blocks of the brain?
</QUOTE>
I keep coming back to this thread about levels, along with others
on the related issue of paradigms, as those have long been major
questions for me. I am trying to clarify my current understanding
for a blog post. It will start out a bit like this —
A certain amount of “level” language is natural in the sciences
but “level” metaphors come with hidden assumptions about higher and
lower places in hierarchies which don't always fit the case at hand.
In complex cases what look at first like parallel strata may in time
be better comprehended as intersecting domains or mutually recursive
and entangled orders of being. When that happens we can guard against
misleading imagery by speaking of domains or realms instead of levels.
To be continued …
Regards,
Jon
Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 7
• http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2023/07/23/survey-of-pragmatic-semiotic-infor…
This is a Survey of blog and wiki posts on a concept of information
as it develops out of pragmatic semiotic ideas. All my projects are
exploratory in character but this line of inquiry is more open‑ended
than most. The question is —
• What is information and how does it impact
the spectrum of activities answering to the
name of inquiry?
Setting out on what would become his lifelong quest to explore
and explain the “Logic of Science”, C.S. Peirce pierced the veil
of historical confusions obscuring the issue and fixed on what he
called the “laws of information” as the key to solving the puzzle.
The first hints of the Information Revolution in our understanding
of scientific inquiry may be traced to Peirce's lectures of 1865–1866
at Harvard University and the Lowell Institute. There Peirce took up
“the puzzle of the validity of scientific inference” and claimed it
was “entirely removed by a consideration of the laws of information”.
Fast forward to the present and I see the Big Question as follows.
Having gone through the exercise of comparing and contrasting Peirce's
theory of information, however much it yet remains in a rough‑hewn state,
with Shannon's paradigm so pervasively informing the ongoing revolution
in our understanding and use of information, I have reason to believe
Peirce's idea is root and branch more general and has the potential,
with due development, to resolve many mysteries still bedeviling our
grasp of inference, information, and inquiry.
Regards,
Jon
Pragmatic Semiotic Information • Ψ
• http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2023/07/22/pragmatic-semiotic-information-%cf…
All,
I remember it was back in ’76 when I began to notice a subtle shift of
focus in the computer science journals I was reading, from discussing X
to discussing “Information About X”, or X → Info(X) as I came to notate
the transformation. I suppose that small arc of revolution had been
building for years but it struck me as crossing a threshold to a more
explicit, self‑conscious stage about that time.
Regards,
Jon
Functional Logic • Inquiry and Analogy • Preliminaries
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2023/06/20/functional-logic-inquiry-and-anal…
Functional Logic • Inquiry and Analogy
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Functional_Logic_%E2%80%A2_Inquiry_and_Analogy
This report discusses C.S. Peirce's treatment of analogy,
placing it in relation to his overall theory of inquiry.
We begin by introducing three basic types of reasoning
Peirce adopted from classical logic. In Peirce's analysis
both inquiry and analogy are complex programs of logical
inference which develop through stages of these three types,
though normally in different orders.
Note on notation. The discussion to follow uses logical conjunctions,
expressed in the form of concatenated tuples e₁…eₖ, and minimal negation
operations, expressed in the form of bracketed tuples (e₁,…,eₖ), as the
principal expression-forming operations of a calculus for boolean-valued
functions, that is, for propositions. The expressions of this calculus
parse into data structures whose underlying graphs are called “cacti” by
graph theorists. Hence the name “cactus language” for this dialect of
propositional calculus.
Resources —
Logic Syllabus
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Logic_Syllabus
Boolean Function
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Boolean_function
Boolean-Valued Function
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Boolean-valued_function
Logical Conjunction
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Logical_conjunction
Minimal Negation Operator
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Minimal_negation_operator
Regards,
Jon
