[Inquiry] Re: Relatives Of Second Intention

[Jon Awbrey]

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

ROSI.  Note 4

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

| Classification of Simple Relatives (cont.)
|
| a.  Simple relatives are in this way primarily divisible into relatives
|     all of whose elements are of the form (A:A) and those which contain
|     elements of the form (A:B).  The former express a mere agreement
|     among things, the latter set one thing over against another,
|     and in that sense express an opposition ['antikeisthai'];
|     I shall therefore term the former 'concurrents'*, and
|     the latter 'opponents'.  The distinction appears in
|     this notation as between relatives with a comma,
|     such as (w,) [i.e., "woman that is __"] and
|     relatives without a comma, such as ('w')
|     [i.e., "wife of __"];  and is evidently
|     of the highest importance.  The character
|     which is signified by a concurrent relative
|     is an absolute character, that signified by
|     an opponent is a relative character, that is,
|     one which cannot be prescinded from reference
|     to a correlate.
|
|* [Marginal Note] "As we speak of 'self-loving', etc., the
|  former of these classes should be called self-relatives"
|
| C.S. Peirce, CP 3.136
|
| C.S. Peirce,
|"Description of a Notation for the Logic of Relatives,
| Resulting from an Amplification of the Conceptions of Boole's Calculus of Logic",
|'Memoirs of the American Academy', Volume 9, pages 317-378, 26 January 1870,
|'Collected Papers' (CP 3.45-149), 'Chronological Edition' (CE 2, 359-429).

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