[Inquiry] Re: Logic 101

[Jon Awbrey]

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

LOG.  Note 16

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

| Lowell Lecture 9 (cont.)
|
| Next suppose a Symbol whose intended function is the
| reference to an object or correlate.  The reference
| of a Symbol to its object is its 'truth'.  This kind
| of symbol is therefore one which is intended merely
| to Embody a truth.  So that it is a 'proposition'.
|
| But as reference to a correlate cannot be intended or even
| supposed without reference to a ground, as truth 'supposes'
| meaning, to intend that a symbol should refer to a correlate
| is to intend that it should refer to correlate and ground,
| that is be a relate, by imputation;  or in other words stand
| instead of a relate -- or represent a relate.  So that to say
| that a proposition is a symbol which is intended to refer to a
| correlate is the same as to say that it is one which represents
| a relate as such.
|
| In the third place, a symbol may be intended to refer to an interpretant
| or to have 'force'.  It is, then, intended also to contain a statement,
| since reference to an interpretant cannot be prescinded from the other
| references.  It is intended therefore to inculcate this statement into
| the interpretant;  that is to produce the equivalent statement with
| the interpretant -- not merely the statement that this symbol makes
| the statement, but a restatement.  For an interpretant is something
| which represents a representation to represent that which it does
| itself represent.  Now that which, thus, appeals to an interpretant --
| that is is constructed and intended so as to develope a restatement
| on the part of another or assent -- is an argument, a syllogism
| 'minus' the conclusion, for the Conclusion of a syllogism is no
| part of the argument but is the assent to it, the interpretant.
|
| An argument, therefore, is a symbol intended to refer
| to an interpretant and I could show very easily that
| this is the same as a symbol which from its form,
| represents a representation.
|
| C.S. Peirce, 'Chronological Edition', CE 1, 477-478
|
|"The Logic of Science, or, Induction and Hypothesis",
| Lowell Institute Lectures (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.

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