Tag Archives: Icon Index Symbol

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 6:40 am on June 18, 2026
Tags: , , , , , Hypothesis, Icon Index Symbol, , , , , Intension, , Peirce's Categories, Pragmatic Semiotic Information, , , ,   

Information = Comprehension × Extension • Preamble

Perhaps the best perspective from which to bring the connection between the theory of signs and the theory of inquiry into its proper focus is Peirce’s own Theory of Information, which he began setting forth in lectures at Harvard and the Lowell Institute in 1865 and 1866.  Peirce encapsulates the elements of his theory in the following formula.

Information = Comprehension × Extension

In the Resources below I link to my study of Peirce’s 1865–1866 Lectures on the Logic of Science, with selections from the lectures and my commentary on them.

Ten summers ago I hit on what struck me as a new insight into one of the most recalcitrant problems in Peirce’s semiotics and logic of science, namely, the relation between “the manner in which different representations stand for their objects” and the way in which different inferences transform states of information.  I roughed out a sketch of my epiphany in a series of blog posts then set it aside for the cool of later reflection.  Now looks to be a choice moment for taking another look.

A first pass through the variations of representation and reasoning detects the axes of iconic, indexical, and symbolic manners of representation on the one hand and the axes of abductive, inductive, and deductive modes of inference on the other.  Early and often Peirce suggests a natural correspondence between the main modes of inference and the main manners of representation but his early arguments differ from his later accounts in ways deserving close examination, partly for the extra points in his line of reasoning and partly for his explanation of indices as signs constituted by convening the variant conceptions of sundry interpreters.

References

  • Peirce, C.S. (1866), “The Logic of Science, or, Induction and Hypothesis”, Lowell Lectures of 1866, pp. 357–504 in Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Volume 1, 1857–1866, Peirce Edition Project, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1982.
  • Peirce, C.S. (1867), “Upon Logical Comprehension and Extension”, Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 7, pp. 416–432.  Archive.  Online.

Resources

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

#abduction, #c-s-peirce, #comprehension, #deduction, #extension, #hypothesis, #icon-index-symbol, #induction, #inference, #information-comprehension-x-extension, #inquiry, #intension, #logic, #peirces-categories, #pragmatic-semiotic-information, #pragmatism, #scientific-method, #semiotics, #sign-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 7:00 am on June 14, 2026
Tags: , , , Icon Index Symbol, , , , , , , , , , ,   

Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 4

Re: Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 3
Re: Laws of Form • Lyle Anderson

Lyle,

We are here engaged in the wider context of which Peirce’s systems of graphs for propositional logic and Spencer Brown’s calculus of indications constitute a prominent corner, one might even say a “cantonical field”, but still just one corner of the larger picture, abstractly syntactic and formally deductive in character.

Over and above that niche the overarching edifice of Peirce’s Logic of Science, supported by the theory of signs and the theory of inquiry, must cover all three forms of inference — abductive, inductive, deductive — plus the bridge from qualitative logic to quantitative statistics.  That is the architecture of inquiry with which we’ll be occupied for quite some time.

Continuing from where I left off last time —

What intrigues me about the recently cited passages from Aristotle is the way he uses what we now regard as semiotic terms — icon, index, sign — to describe the elements and structures of logical syllogisms, including the modes of non‑demonstrative inference.

The roles of signs informing sign relations and the rules of inference guiding inquiries are subjects Peirce explored in depth.  Especially in the early years the subjects of signs and inquiry are so entwined in Peirce’s relevant lectures and papers that he passes from one to the other with little sense of discontinuity between the two.

Over the years, both in Peirce’s work and the community of researchers following after, there develops such an intense focus on the problem of classifying signs that the theory of signs takes on the character of a separate subject, detached from its natural connection to the theory of inquiry.

One of our tasks is to heal that rift and regain a sense of the original common root.

Resource

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

#analogy, #aristotle, #c-s-peirce, #icon-index-symbol, #induction, #inquiry, #likelihood, #likely-story, #likeness, #logic, #mathematics, #probability, #probable-reasoning, #semiotics, #sign-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 11:34 am on May 23, 2026
Tags: , , , Icon Index Symbol, , , , , , , , , , ,   

Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 3

Re: Peirce List • Phyllis Chiasson

A more complete excerpt and the translator’s notes are very helpful here.

A probability (εικος) is not the same as a sign (σηµειον).  The former is a generally accepted premiss ;  for that which people know to happen or not to happen, or to be or not to be, usually in a particular way, is a probability :  e.g., that the envious are malevolent or that those who are loved are affectionate.  A sign, however, means a demonstrative premiss which is necessary or generally accepted.1  That which coexists with something else, or before or after whose happening something else has happened, is a sign of that something’s having happened or being.

An enthymeme is a syllogism from probabilities or signs ;  and a sign can be taken in three ways — in just as many ways as there are of taking the middle term in the several figures :  either as in the first figure or as in the second or as in the third.

  • E.g., the proof that a woman is pregnant because she has milk is by the first figure ;  for the middle term is ‘having milk’.  A stands for ‘pregnant’, B for ‘having milk’, and C for ‘woman’.
  • The proof that the wise are good because Pittacus was good is by the third figure.  A stands for ‘good’, B for ‘the wise’, and C for Pittacus.  Then it is true to predicate both A and B of C ;  only we do not state the latter, because we know it, whereas we formally assume the former.
  • The proof that a woman is pregnant because she is sallow is intended to be by the middle figure ;  for since sallowness is a characteristic of woman in pregnancy, and is associated with this particular woman, they suppose that she is proved to be pregnant.  A stands for ‘sallowness’, B for ‘being pregnant’, C for ‘woman’.

If only one premiss is stated, we get only a sign ;  but if the other premiss is assumed as well, we get a syllogism,2 e.g., that Pittacus is high-minded, because those who love honour are high-minded, and Pittacus loves honour ;  or again that the wise are good, because Pittacus is good and also wise.

In this way syllogisms can be effected ;  but whereas a syllogism in the first figure cannot be refuted if it is true, since it is universal, a syllogism in the last figure can be refuted even if the conclusion is true, because the syllogism is neither universal nor relevant to our purpose.3  For if Pittacus is good, it is not necessary for this reason that all other wise men are good.  A syllogism in the middle figure is always and in every way refutable, since we never get a syllogism with the terms in this relation4 ;  for it does not necessarily follow, if a pregnant woman is sallow, and this woman is sallow, that she is pregnant.  Thus truth can be found in all signs, but they differ in the ways which have been described.

We must either classify signs in this way, and regard their middle term as an index (τεκµηριον)5 (for the name ‘index’ is given to that which causes us to know, and the middle term is especially of this nature), or describe the arguments drawn from the extremes6 as ‘signs’, and that which is drawn from the middle as an ‘index’.  For the conclusion which is reached through the first figure is most generally accepted and most true.  (Aristotle, Prior Analytics 2.27, 70a3–70b6).

Translator’s Notes

  1. If referable to one phenomenon only, a sign has objective necessity ;  if to more than one, its value is a matter of opinion.
  2. Strictly an enthymeme.
  3. If the signs of an enthymeme in the first figure are true, the conclusion is inevitable.  Aristotle does not mean that the conclusion is universal, but that the universality of the major premiss implies the validity of the minor and conclusion.  The example (<all> those who have honour, etc.) quoted for the third figure contains no universal premiss or sign, and fails to establish a universal conclusion.
  4. i.e. when both premisses are affirmative.
  5. Signs may be classified as irrefutable (1st figure) and refutable (2nd and 3rd figures), and the name ‘index’ may be attached to their middle terms, either in all figures or (more probably) only in the first, where the middle is distinctively middle.
  6. Alternatively the name ‘sign’ may be restricted to the 2nd and 3rd figures, and may be replaced by ‘index’ in the first.

Reference

  • Aristotle, “Prior Analytics”, Hugh Tredennick (trans.), pp. 181–531 in Aristotle, Volume 1, Loeb Classical Library, William Heinemann, London, UK, 1938.

Resource

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

#analogy, #aristotle, #c-s-peirce, #icon-index-symbol, #induction, #inquiry, #likelihood, #likely-story, #likeness, #logic, #mathematics, #probability, #probable-reasoning, #semiotics, #sign-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 8:45 am on May 20, 2026
Tags: , , , Icon Index Symbol, , , , , , , , , , ,   

Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 2

Re: Peirce List • Phyllis Chiasson

I’m still a bit fuzzy on how Aristotle’s account relates to Peirce’s usage, though I’m pretty sure Peirce must have taken Aristotle’s usage into account, but it does seem that Aristotle drew some sort of distinction here, using a term “tekmerion” which gets translated as “index” to make the following remark later on in that chapter.

We must either classify signs in this way, and regard their middle term as an index [τεκµηριον] (for the name ‘index’ is given to that which causes us to know, and the middle term is especially of this nature), or describe the arguments drawn from the extremes as ‘signs’, and that which is drawn from the middle as an ‘index’.  For the conclusion which is reached through the first figure is most generally accepted and most true.  (Aristotle, Prior Analytics, 2.27.70b1–6).

Reference

  • Aristotle, “Prior Analytics”, Hugh Tredennick (trans.), pp. 181–531 in Aristotle, Volume 1, Loeb Classical Library, William Heinemann, London, UK, 1938.

Resource

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

#analogy, #aristotle, #c-s-peirce, #icon-index-symbol, #induction, #inquiry, #likelihood, #likely-story, #likeness, #logic, #mathematics, #probability, #probable-reasoning, #semiotics, #sign-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 4:48 pm on May 18, 2026
Tags: , , , Icon Index Symbol, , , , , , , , , , ,   

Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 1

Re: Peirce List • Benjamin Udell • Michael Shapiro

Here’s a likely locus classicus for “icon” in its logical sense —

A probability (εικος) is not the same as a sign (σηµειον).  The former is a generally accepted premiss;  for that which people know to happen or not to happen, or to be or not to be, usually in a particular way, is a probability:  e.g., that the envious are malevolent or that those who are loved are affectionate.  A sign, however, means a demonstrative premiss which is necessary or generally accepted.  That which coexists with something else, or before or after whose happening something else has happened, is a sign of that something’s having happened or being.  (Aristotle, Prior Analytics, 2.27.70a3–10).

Reference

  • Aristotle, “Prior Analytics”, Hugh Tredennick (trans.), pp. 181–531 in Aristotle, Volume 1, Loeb Classical Library, William Heinemann, London, UK, 1938.

Resource

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

#analogy, #aristotle, #c-s-peirce, #icon-index-symbol, #induction, #inquiry, #likelihood, #likely-story, #likeness, #logic, #mathematics, #probability, #probable-reasoning, #semiotics, #sign-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 2:00 pm on November 12, 2025
Tags: , Icon Index Symbol, , , , , , , , , , Triadicity,   

Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 6

C.S. Peirce defines logic as “formal semiotic”, using formal to highlight the place of logic as a normative science, over and above the descriptive study of signs and their role in wider fields of play.  Understanding logic as Peirce understands it thus requires a companion study of semiotics, semiosis, and sign relations.

What follows is a Survey of blog and wiki resources on the theory of signs, variously known as semeiotic or semiotics, and the actions referred to as semiosis which transform signs among themselves in relation to their objects, all as based on C.S. Peirce’s concept of triadic sign relations.

Elements

Blog Series

  • Peircean Semiotics and Triadic Sign Relations • (1) • (2) • (3)

Blog Dialogs

Sources

  • C.S. Peirce • Algebra of Logic ∫ Philosophy of Notation • (1) • (2)
  • C.S. Peirce • Algebra of Logic 1885 • Selections • (1) • (2) • (3) • (4)

Topics

Excursions

  • Semiositis • (1)
  • Signspiel • (1)
  • Skiourosemiosis • (1)

References

  • Awbrey, S.M., and Awbrey, J.L. (2001), “Conceptual Barriers to Creating Integrative Universities”, Organization : The Interdisciplinary Journal of Organization, Theory, and Society 8(2), Sage Publications, London, UK, 269–284.  Abstract.  Online.
  • Awbrey, S.M., and Awbrey, J.L. (September 1999), “Organizations of Learning or Learning Organizations : The Challenge of Creating Integrative Universities for the Next Century”, Second International Conference of the Journal ‘Organization’, Re‑Organizing Knowledge, Trans‑Forming Institutions : Knowing, Knowledge, and the University in the 21st Century, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.  Online.
  • 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.  Archive.  Journal.  Online (doc) (pdf).
  • Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (1992), “Interpretation as Action : The Risk of Inquiry”, The Eleventh International Human Science Research Conference, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan.

cc: FB | Semeiotics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon • Ontolog • Academia.edu
cc: Conceptual Graphs • Cybernetics • Structural Modeling • Systems Science

#c-s-peirce, #icon-index-symbol, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations, #triadicity, #visualization

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 11:00 am on November 2, 2025
Tags: , , , , Dewey, , , , , Icon Index Symbol, , , , , , , , , Morphism, Paradigmata, Paradigms, Pattern Recognition, , , , , , , , , , Syllogism, ,   

Survey of Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy, Inquiry • 5

This is a Survey of blog and wiki posts on three elementary forms of inference, as recognized by a logical tradition extending from Aristotle through Charles S. Peirce.  Particular attention is paid to the way the inferential rudiments combine to form the more complex patterns of analogy and inquiry.

Anthem

Blog Dialogs

Blog Series

Blog Surveys

OEIS Wiki

Ontolog Forum

cc: FB | Inquiry Driven Systems • Laws of Form • Mathstodon • Academia.edu
cc: Conceptual Graphs • Cybernetics • Structural Modeling • Systems Science

#abduction, #aristotle, #c-s-peirce, #deduction, #dewey, #discovery, #doubt, #fixation-of-belief, #functional-logic, #icon-index-symbol, #induction, #inference, #information, #inquiry, #invention, #logic, #logic-of-science, #mathematics, #morphism, #paradigmata, #paradigms, #pattern-recognition, #peirce, #philosophy, #pragmatic-maxim, #pragmatism, #scientific-inquiry, #scientific-method, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #surveys, #syllogism, #triadic-relations, #visualization