[Inquiry] Re: Peirce's Logic Of Information

[Jon Awbrey]

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

PLOI.  Note 15

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

Cf: ICE 2.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2004-November/001914.html
In: ICE.    http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2004-November/thread.html#1913

Cf: PLOI-DIS 1.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-December/003280.html
In: PLOI-DIS.    http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-December/thread.html#3280

As mentioned in the above Discussion Note, one of the difficulties that
we encounter in trying to model Peirce's blind man story is the problem
of how to handle "improper implications" or "trivial intensions" of the
form "X => X".  On the one hand, any concept or term will significantly
alter the informational situation when it first arises, for example, on
the prompting of an abductive hypothesis or other creative intervention.
On the other hand, Peirce appears to discount these types of intensions
by accounting for the information as the "superfluous comprehension" of
a symbol, in effect, as the intension that a symbol has "over and above
what is necessary for limiting its extension" (CE 1, 276).  I sought to
finesse this issue in my retelling of the story by interjecting a prior
episode where the abductive factorization is more explicitly considered.
Only time will tell whether this is a sensible direction to take or not.

Jon Awbrey

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