Tag Archives: logic

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 11:45 am on December 28, 2025
Tags: , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Sign Relations • Connotation

Another aspect of a sign’s complete meaning concerns the reference a sign has to its interpretants, which interpretants are collectively known as the connotation of the sign.  In the pragmatic theory of sign relations, connotative references fall within the projection of the sign relation on the plane spanned by its sign domain and its interpretant domain.

In the full theory of sign relations the connotative aspect of meaning includes the links a sign has to affects, concepts, ideas, impressions, intentions, and the whole realm of an interpretive agent’s mental states and allied activities, broadly encompassing intellectual associations, emotional impressions, motivational impulses, and real conduct.  Taken at the full, in the natural setting of semiotic phenomena, this complex system of references is unlikely ever to find itself mapped in much detail, much less completely formalized, but the tangible warp of its accumulated mass is commonly alluded to as the connotative import of language.

Formally speaking, however, the connotative aspect of meaning presents no additional difficulty.  The dyadic relation making up the connotative aspect of a sign relation L is notated as \mathrm{Con}(L).  Information about the connotative aspect of meaning is obtained from L by taking its projection on the sign‑interpretant plane and visualized as the “shadow” L casts on the 2‑dimensional space whose axes are the sign domain S and the interpretant domain I.  The connotative component of a sign relation L, variously written as \mathrm{proj}_{SI} L,  L_{SI},  \mathrm{proj}_{23} L,  or L_{23}, is defined as follows.

Display 4

Tables 4a and 4b show the connotative components of the sign relations associated with the interpreters \mathrm{A} and \mathrm{B}, respectively.  The rows of each Table list the ordered pairs (s, i) in the corresponding projections, \mathrm{Con}(L_\mathrm{A}), \mathrm{Con}(L_\mathrm{B}) \subseteq S \times I.

Connotative Components Con(L_A) and Con(L_B)

Resources

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

#c-s-peirce, #connotation, #denotation, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotic-equivalence-relations, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 10:17 am on December 27, 2025
Tags: , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Sign Relations • Denotation

One aspect of a sign’s complete meaning concerns the reference a sign has to its objects, which objects are collectively known as the denotation of the sign.  In the pragmatic theory of sign relations, denotative references fall within the projection of the sign relation on the plane spanned by its object domain and its sign domain.

The dyadic relation making up the denotative, referent, or semantic aspect of a sign relation L is notated as \mathrm{Den}(L).  Information about the denotative aspect of meaning is obtained from L by taking its projection on the object‑sign plane.  The result may be visualized as the “shadow” L casts on the 2‑dimensional space whose axes are the object domain O and the sign domain S.  The denotative component of a sign relation L, variously written as \mathrm{proj}_{OS} L,  L_{OS},  \mathrm{proj}_{12} L,  or L_{12}, is defined as follows.

Display 3

Tables 3a and 3b show the denotative components of the sign relations associated with the interpreters \mathrm{A} and \mathrm{B}, respectively.  The rows of each Table list the ordered pairs (o, s) in the corresponding projections, \mathrm{Den}(L_\mathrm{A}), \mathrm{Den}(L_\mathrm{B}) \subseteq O \times S.

Denotative Components Den(L_A) and Den(L_B)

Looking to the denotative aspects of L_\mathrm{A} and L_\mathrm{B}, various rows of the Tables specify, for example, that \mathrm{A} uses ``\text{i}" to denote \mathrm{A} and ``\text{u}" to denote \mathrm{B}, while \mathrm{B} uses ``\text{i}" to denote \mathrm{B} and ``\text{u}" to denote \mathrm{A}.

Resources

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

#c-s-peirce, #connotation, #denotation, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotic-equivalence-relations, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 11:24 am on December 25, 2025
Tags: , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Sign Relations • Dyadic Aspects

For an arbitrary triadic relation L \subseteq O \times S \times I, whether it happens to be a sign relation or not, there are six dyadic relations obtained by projecting L on one of the planes of the OSI‑space O \times S \times I.  The six dyadic projections of a triadic relation L are defined and notated as shown in Table 2.

\text{Table 2. Dyadic Aspects of Triadic Relations}

Dyadic Aspects of Triadic Relations

By way of unpacking the set‑theoretic notation, here is what the first definition says in ordinary language.

The dyadic relation resulting from the projection of L on the OS‑plane O \times S is written briefly as L_{OS} or written more fully as \mathrm{proj}_{OS}(L) and is defined as the set of all ordered pairs (o, s) in the cartesian product O \times S for which there exists an ordered triple (o, s, i) in L for some element i in the set I.

In the case where L is a sign relation, which it becomes by satisfying one of the definitions of a sign relation, some of the dyadic aspects of L can be recognized as formalizing aspects of sign meaning which have received their share of attention from students of signs over the centuries, and thus they can be associated with traditional concepts and terminology.

Of course, traditions vary with respect to the precise formation and usage of such concepts and terms.  Other aspects of meaning have not received their fair share of attention and thus remain innominate in current anatomies of sign relations.

Resources

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

#c-s-peirce, #connotation, #denotation, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotic-equivalence-relations, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 6:00 pm on December 19, 2025
Tags: , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Sign Relations • Examples

Soon after I made my third foray into grad school, this time in Systems Engineering, I was trying to explain sign relations to my advisor and he, being the very model of a modern systems engineer, asked me to give a concrete example of a sign relation, as simple as possible without being trivial.  After much cudgeling of the grey matter I came up with a pair of examples which had the added benefit of bearing instructive relationships to each other.  Despite their simplicity, the examples to follow have subtleties of their own and their careful treatment serves to illustrate important issues in the general theory of signs.

Imagine a discussion between two people, Ann and Bob, and attend only to the aspects of their interpretive practice involving the use of the following nouns and pronouns.

\{ ``\text{Ann}", ``\text{Bob}", ``\text{I}", ``\text{you}" \}

  • The object domain of their discussion is the set of two people \{ \text{Ann}, \text{Bob} \}.
  • The sign domain of their discussion is the set of four signs \{ ``\text{Ann}", ``\text{Bob}", ``\text{I}", ``\text{you}" \}.

Ann and Bob are not only the passive objects of linguistic references but also the active interpreters of the language they use.  The system of interpretation associated with each language user can be represented in the form of an individual three‑place relation known as the sign relation of that interpreter.

In terms of its set‑theoretic extension, a sign relation L is a subset of a cartesian product O \times S \times I.  The three sets O, S, I are known as the object domain, the sign domain, and the interpretant domain, respectively, of the sign relation L \subseteq O \times S \times I.

Broadly speaking, the three domains of a sign relation may be any sets at all but the types of sign relations contemplated in formal settings are usually constrained to having I \subseteq S.  In those cases it becomes convenient to lump signs and interpretants together in a single class called a sign system or syntactic domain.  In the forthcoming examples S and I are identical as sets, so the same elements manifest themselves in two different roles of the sign relations in question.

When it becomes necessary to refer to the whole set of objects and signs in the union of the domains O, S, I for a given sign relation L, we will call this set the World of L and write W = W_L = O \cup S \cup I.

To facilitate an interest in the formal structures of sign relations and to keep notations as simple as possible as the examples become more complicated, it serves to introduce the following general notations.

Display 1

Introducing a few abbreviations for use in the Example, we have the following data.

Display 2

In the present example, S = I = \text{Syntactic Domain}.

Tables 1a and 1b show the sign relations associated with the interpreters \mathrm{A} and \mathrm{B}, respectively.  In this arrangement the rows of each Table list the ordered triples of the form (o, s, i) belonging to the corresponding sign relations, L_\mathrm{A}, L_\mathrm{B} \subseteq O \times S \times I.

Sign Relation Twin Tables LA & LB

The Tables codify a rudimentary level of interpretive practice for the agents \mathrm{A} and \mathrm{B} and provide a basis for formalizing the initial semantics appropriate to their common syntactic domain.  Each row of a Table lists an object and two co‑referent signs, together forming an ordered triple (o, s, i) called an elementary sign relation, in other words, one element of the relation’s set‑theoretic extension.

Already in this elementary context, there are several meanings which might attach to the project of a formal semiotics, or a formal theory of meaning for signs.  In the process of discussing the alternatives, it is useful to introduce a few terms occasionally used in the philosophy of language to point out the needed distinctions.  That is the task we’ll turn to next.

Resources

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

#c-s-peirce, #connotation, #denotation, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotic-equivalence-relations, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 12:56 pm on December 16, 2025
Tags: , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Sign Relations • Signs and Inquiry

There is a close relationship between the pragmatic theory of signs and the pragmatic theory of inquiry.  In fact, the correspondence between the two studies exhibits so many congruences and parallels it is often best to treat them as integral parts of one and the same subject.  In a very real sense, inquiry is the process by which sign relations come to be established and continue to evolve.  In other words, inquiry, “thinking” in its best sense, “is a term denoting the various ways in which things acquire significance” (Dewey, 38).

Tracing the passage of inquiry through the medium of signs calls for an active, intricate form of cooperation between the converging modes of investigation.  Its proper character is best understood by realizing the theory of inquiry is adapted to study the developmental aspects of sign relations, a subject the theory of signs is specialized to treat from comparative and structural points of view.

References

  • Dewey, J. (1910), How We Think, D.C. Heath, Boston, MA.  Reprinted (1991), Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY.  Online.
  • Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (1995), “Interpretation as Action : The Risk of Inquiry”, Inquiry : Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 15(1), pp. 40–52.  Archive.  Journal.  Online (doc) (pdf).

Resources

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

#c-s-peirce, #connotation, #denotation, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotic-equivalence-relations, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 12:00 pm on December 15, 2025
Tags: , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Sign Relations • Definition

One of Peirce’s clearest and most complete definitions of a sign is one he gives in the context of providing a definition for logic, and so it is informative to view it in that setting.

Logic will here be defined as formal semiotic.  A definition of a sign will be given which no more refers to human thought than does the definition of a line as the place which a particle occupies, part by part, during a lapse of time.  Namely, a sign is something, A, which brings something, B, its interpretant sign determined or created by it, into the same sort of correspondence with something, C, its object, as that in which itself stands to C.

It is from this definition, together with a definition of “formal”, that I deduce mathematically the principles of logic.  I also make a historical review of all the definitions and conceptions of logic, and show, not merely that my definition is no novelty, but that my non‑psychological conception of logic has virtually been quite generally held, though not generally recognized.

— C.S. Peirce, New Elements of Mathematics, vol. 4, 20–21

In the general discussion of diverse theories of signs, the question arises whether signhood is an absolute, essential, indelible, or ontological property of a thing, or whether it is a relational, interpretive, and mutable role a thing may be said to have only within a particular context of relationships.

Peirce’s definition of a sign defines it in relation to its objects and its interpretant signs, and thus defines signhood in relative terms, by means of a predicate with three places.  In that definition, signhood is a role in a triadic relation, a role a thing bears or plays in a determinate context of relationships — it is not an absolute or non‑relative property of a thing‑in‑itself, one it possesses independently of all relationships to other things.

Some of the terms Peirce uses in his definition of a sign may need to be elaborated for the contemporary reader.

  • Correspondence.  From the way Peirce uses the term throughout his work, it is clear he means what he elsewhere calls a “triple correspondence”, and thus this is just another way of referring to the whole triadic sign relation itself.  In particular, his use of the term should not be taken to imply a dyadic correspondence, like the kinds of “mirror image” correspondence between realities and representations bandied about in contemporary controversies about “correspondence theories of truth”.
  • Determination.  Peirce’s concept of determination is broader in several directions than the sense of the word referring to strictly deterministic causal‑temporal processes.  First, and especially in this context, he is invoking a more general concept of determination, what is called a formal or informational determination, as in saying “two points determine a line”, rather than the more special cases of causal and temporal determinisms.  Second, he characteristically allows for what is called determination in measure, that is, an order of determinism admitting a full spectrum of more and less determined relationships.
  • Non‑psychological.  Peirce’s “non‑psychological conception of logic” must be distinguished from any variety of anti‑psychologism.  He was quite interested in matters of psychology and had much of import to say about them.  But logic and psychology operate on different planes of study even when they have occasion to view the same data, as logic is a normative science where psychology is a descriptive science, and so they have very different aims, methods, and rationales.

Reference

  • Peirce, C.S. (1902), “Parts of Carnegie Application” (L 75), in Carolyn Eisele (ed., 1976), The New Elements of Mathematics by Charles S. Peirce, vol. 4, 13–73.  Online.

Resources

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

#c-s-peirce, #connotation, #denotation, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotic-equivalence-relations, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 9:36 am on December 14, 2025
Tags: , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Sign Relations • Anthesis

Thus, if a sunflower, in turning towards the sun, becomes by that very act fully capable, without further condition, of reproducing a sunflower which turns in precisely corresponding ways toward the sun, and of doing so with the same reproductive power, the sunflower would become a Representamen of the sun.

— C.S. Peirce, Collected Papers, CP 2.274

In his picturesque illustration of a sign relation, along with his tracing of a corresponding sign process, or semiosis, Peirce uses the technical term representamen for his concept of a sign, but the shorter word is precise enough, so long as one recognizes its meaning in a particular theory of signs is given by a specific definition of what it means to be a sign.

Resources

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

#c-s-peirce, #connotation, #denotation, #inquiry, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #mathematics, #relation-theory, #semiosis, #semiotic-equivalence-relations, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 7:16 am on November 20, 2025
Tags: Algorithms, , , , , , , , Data Structures, , , , , , , , logic, , , , , , , ,   

Survey of Theme One Program • 7

This is a Survey of resources relating to the Theme One Program I worked on all through the 1980s.  The aim was to develop fundamental algorithms and data structures for integrating empirical learning with logical reasoning.  I had earlier developed separate programs for basic components of those tasks, in particular, two‑level formal language learning and propositional constraint satisfaction, the latter using an extension of C.S. Peirce’s logical graphs as a syntax for propositional logic.  Thus arose the question of how well it might be possible to get “empiricist” and “rationalist” modes of operation to cooperate.  The long‑term vision is the implementation of an Automated Research Tool able to double as a platform for Inquiry Driven Education.

Wiki Hub

Documentation

Blog Series

Blog Dialogs

Applications

References

  • Awbrey, S.M., and Awbrey, J.L. (May 1991), “An Architecture for Inquiry • Building Computer Platforms for Discovery”, Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Technology and Education, Toronto, Canada, pp. 874–875.  Online.
  • Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (January 1991), “Exploring Research Data Interactively • Developing a Computer Architecture for Inquiry”, Poster presented at the Annual Sigma Xi Research Forum, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX.
  • Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (August 1990), “Exploring Research Data Interactively • Theme One : A Program of Inquiry”, Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference on Applications of Artificial Intelligence and CD-ROM in Education and Training, Society for Applied Learning Technology, Washington, DC, pp. 9–15.  Online.

cc: FB | Theme One Program • Laws of Form • Mathstodon • Academia.edu
cc: Conceptual Graphs • Cybernetics • Structural Modeling • Systems Science

#algorithms, #animata, #artificial-intelligence, #automated-research-tools, #boolean-functions, #c-s-peirce, #cactus-graphs, #constraint-satisfaction-problems, #data-structures, #differential-logic, #equational-inference, #formal-languages, #graph-theory, #inquiry-driven-systems, #laws-of-form, #learning-theory, #logic, #logical-graphs, #mathematics, #minimal-negation-operators, #painted-cacti, #propositional-calculus, #propositional-equation-reasoning-systems, #spencer-brown, #visualization

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 1:00 pm on November 18, 2025
Tags: Abstraction, Ackermann, , , , Carnap, , , Hilbert, Hypostatic Abstraction, Kant, logic, , Propositions As Types Analogy, , Saunders Mac Lane, , , Universals   

Survey of Precursors Of Category Theory • 6

A few years ago I began a sketch on the “Precursors of Category Theory”, tracing the continuities of the category concept from Aristotle, to Kant and Peirce, through Hilbert and Ackermann, to contemporary mathematical practice.  A Survey of resources on the topic is given below, still very rough and incomplete, but perhaps a few will find it of use.

Background

Blog Series

Categories à la Peirce

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

#abstraction, #ackermann, #analogy, #aristotle, #c-s-peirce, #carnap, #category-theory, #foundations-of-mathematics, #hilbert, #hypostatic-abstraction, #kant, #logic, #mathematics, #propositions-as-types-analogy, #relation-theory, #saunders-mac-lane, #semiotics, #type-theory, #universals

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 11:30 am on November 15, 2025
Tags: , , , , , , Computational Complexity, , , , , , , logic, , , , , , , Proof Theory, , , , Theorem Proving,   

Survey of Animated Logical Graphs • 8

This is a Survey of blog and wiki posts on Logical Graphs, encompassing several families of graph‑theoretic structures originally developed by Charles S. Peirce as graphical formal languages or visual styles of syntax amenable to interpretation for logical applications.

Beginnings

Elements

Examples

Blog Series

  • Logical Graphs • Interpretive Duality • (1) • (2) • (3) • (4)
  • Logical Graphs, Iconicity, Interpretation • (1) • (2)
  • Genus, Species, Pie Charts, Radio Buttons • (1)

Excursions

Applications

Anamnesis

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

#amphecks, #animata, #boolean-algebra, #boolean-functions, #c-s-peirce, #cactus-graphs, #computational-complexity, #constraint-satisfaction-problems, #differential-logic, #equational-inference, #graph-theory, #group-theory, #laws-of-form, #logic, #logical-graphs, #mathematics, #minimal-negation-operators, #model-theory, #painted-cacti, #peirce, #proof-theory, #propositional-calculus, #propositional-equation-reasoning-systems, #spencer-brown, #theorem-proving, #visualization

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 2:00 pm on November 12, 2025
Tags: , , , logic, , , , , , , , 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 9:00 am on November 11, 2025
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , logic, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,   

Survey of Pragmatic Semiotic Information • 9

This is a Survey of blog and wiki posts on a theory of information which grows 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.

Inference, Information, Inquiry

Pragmatic Semiotic Information

Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations

Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relation Theory

  • Blog Series • (1)
    • Discusssions • (1) • (2)

Excursions

Blog Dialogs

References

  • Peirce, C.S. (1867), “Upon Logical Comprehension and Extension”.  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).

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

#abduction, #c-s-peirce, #communication, #control, #cybernetics, #deduction, #determination, #discovery, #doubt, #epistemology, #fixation-of-belief, #induction, #information, #information-comprehension-x-extension, #information-theory, #inquiry, #inquiry-driven-systems, #inquiry-into-inquiry, #interpretation, #invention, #knowledge, #learning-theory, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #logic-of-science, #mathematics, #philosophy-of-science, #pragmatic-information, #probable-reasoning, #process-thinking, #relation-theory, #scientific-inquiry, #scientific-method, #semeiosis, #semiosis, #semiotic-information, #semiotics, #sign-relational-manifolds, #sign-relations, #surveys, #triadic-relations, #uncertainty, #visualization

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 11:48 am on November 9, 2025
Tags: , Algebra of Logic, , , , Discrete Mathematics, Duality, Dyadic Relations, , , , , logic, , , , , , , Set Theory, , , ,   

Survey of Relation Theory • 9

In the present Survey of blog and wiki resources for Relation Theory, relations are viewed from the perspective of combinatorics, in other words, as a topic in discrete mathematics, with special attention to finite structures and concrete set‑theoretic constructions, many of which arise quite naturally in applications.  This approach to relation theory is distinct from, though closely related to, its study from the perspectives of abstract algebra on the one hand and formal logic on the other.

Elements

Relational Concepts

Relation Composition Relation Construction Relation Reduction
Relative Term Sign Relation Triadic Relation
Logic of Relatives Hypostatic Abstraction Continuous Predicate

Illustrations

Information‑Theoretic Perspective

  • Mathematical Demonstration and the Doctrine of Individuals • (1) • (2)

Blog Series

Peirce’s 1870 “Logic of Relatives”

Peirce’s 1880 “Algebra of Logic” Chapter 3

Peirce’s 1885 “Algebra of Logic”

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

Resources

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

#algebra, #algebra-of-logic, #c-s-peirce, #category-theory, #combinatorics, #discrete-mathematics, #duality, #dyadic-relations, #formal-languages, #foundations-of-mathematics, #graph-theory, #group-theory, #logic, #logic-of-relatives, #logical-graphs, #mathematics, #model-theory, #relation-theory, #semiotics, #set-theory, #sign-relational-manifolds, #sign-relations, #triadic-relations, #type-theory

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 11:20 am on November 7, 2025
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Frankl Conjecture, , , , , , , logic, , , , ,   

Survey of Differential Logic • 8

This is a Survey of work in progress on Differential Logic, resources under development toward a more systematic treatment.

Differential logic is the component of logic whose object is the description of variation — the aspects of change, difference, distribution, and diversity — in universes of discourse subject to logical description.  A definition as broad as that naturally incorporates any study of variation by way of mathematical models, but differential logic is especially charged with the qualitative aspects of variation pervading or preceding quantitative models.  To the extent a logical inquiry makes use of a formal system, its differential component treats the use of a differential logical calculus — a formal system with the expressive capacity to describe change and diversity in logical universes of discourse.

Elements

Blog Series

Architectonics

Applications

Blog Dialogs

Explorations

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

#amphecks, #animata, #boolean-algebra, #boolean-functions, #c-s-peirce, #cactus-graphs, #category-theory, #change, #cybernetics, #differential-analytic-turing-automata, #differential-calculus, #differential-logic, #discrete-dynamics, #equational-inference, #frankl-conjecture, #functional-logic, #gradient-descent, #graph-theory, #hologrammautomaton, #inquiry-driven-systems, #leibniz, #logic, #logical-graphs, #mathematics, #minimal-negation-operators, #propositional-calculus, #visualization

Unknown's avatar Jon Awbrey 7:20 am on November 5, 2025
Tags: , Comprehension, Constraint, , , Extension, Form, Indication, , , , logic, , , , , Structure, Systems Theory,   

Survey of Definition and Determination • 4

In the early 1990s, “in the middle of life’s journey” as the saying goes, I returned to grad school in a systems engineering program with the idea of taking a more systems-theoretic approach to my development of Peircean themes, from signs and scientific inquiry to logic and information theory.

Two of the first questions calling for fresh examination were the closely related concepts of definition and determination, not only as Peirce used them in his logic and semiotics but as researchers in areas as diverse as computer science, cybernetics, physics, and systems science would find themselves forced to reconsider the concepts in later years.  That led me to collect a sample of texts where Peirce and a few other writers discuss the issues of definition and determination.  There are copies of those selections at the following sites.

What follows is a Survey of blog and wiki posts on Definition and Determination, with a focus on the part they play in Peirce’s interlinked theories of signs, information, and inquiry.  In classical logical traditions the concepts of definition and determination are closely related and their bond acquires all the more force when we view the overarching concept of constraint from an information-theoretic point of view, as Peirce did beginning in the 1860s.

Blog Dialogs

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

#c-s-peirce, #comprehension, #constraint, #definition, #determination, #extension, #form, #indication, #information, #information-comprehension-x-extension, #inquiry-driven-systems, #logic, #mathematics, #scientific-method, #semiotics, #sign-relations, #structure, #systems-theory, #visualization