[Inquiry] Re: Logic Of Relatives -- Commentary

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

LOR.  Commentary Note 1

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

I am going to experiment with an interlacing commentary
on Peirce's 1870 "Logic of Relatives" paper, revisiting
some critical transitions from several different angles
and calling attention to a variety of puzzles, problems,
and potentials that are not so often remarked or tapped.

What strikes me about the initial installment this time around is its
use of a certain pattern of argument that I can recognize as invoking
a "closure principle", and this is a figure of reasoning that Peirce
uses in three other places:  his discussion of "continuous relations",
his definition of sign relations, and in the pragmatic maxim itself.

One might also call attention to the following two statements:

| Now logical terms are of three grand classes.

| No fourth class of terms exists involving the conception of 'fourth',
| because when that of 'third' is introduced, since it involves the
| conception of bringing objects into relation, all higher numbers are
| given at once, inasmuch as the conception of bringing objects into
| relation is independent of the number of members of the relationship.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o