[Inquiry] Re: Futures Of Logical Graphs -- Discussion

[Jon Awbrey]

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

FOLG.  Discussion Note 24

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

JA = Jon Awbrey
JR = Joe Ransdell

Re: FOLG-DIS 20.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-November/003174.html
In: FOLG-DIS.     http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-November/thread.html#3167

JA: Inasmuch as the anticipation on this score seems to be mounting,
    here is the list of possibly relevant meanings of "involvement"
    that I had drawn up when I started down this particular path:

JA: | Meanings Of Involvement:
    |
    | Approximation
    | Component (Relational)
    | Constituent (Syntactic)
    | Explanation
    | Implication
    | Projection

JA: Some of these are closely related, for instance,
    approximation and projection, at least as taken
    in their mathematical senses, but other senses
    are independent if not opposed to each other.

JR: I don't know whether to laugh or cry when you say something like that, Jon, 
    so I will just joke with you and say that I can only perceive in this a case 
    of philosophobia, apparently caused by severe vagophobia.  Wrong path, Jon! 
    No need to "define your terms":  tear down those cactus-logic fences and
    smell the ... well, it's not roses that you have to be willing to smell
    if you are going to follow the path of philosophy!

Best I can tell the rule of interest is something like this:

| Some things are philosophically interesting.
| Some things are not.
| But --
| They ain't nothing til JR calls 'em.

JR: But seriously, you are not responding to those quotations from Peirce at all,
    which apparently you cannot bring yourself to read closely, as is obvious from
    your attempt to turn this into an inquiry into the meaning of "involves" when
    that term actually plays little role in those quotations.   Or is it possible
    that you don't know what list of quotations I am referring to?

But seriously, I have already noted, sometimes typed myself,
and commented on all these quotations several times by now,
but like a lot stuff that Peirce wrote, much of it seems
to fly under your radar, or fall between your ellipses.

General Ripper
(just a name)

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