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

[Jon Awbrey]

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

FOLG.  Discussion Note 39

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

JA = Jon Awbrey
JR = Joe Ransdell

Re: FOLG-DIS 36.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-November/003211.html
In: FOLG-DIS.     http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-November/thread.html#3167

Joe, Peirce List,

On to the last point.

JR: You purport to be able to work with a notion of symbolism
    which permits you to assume that symbol-based inferential
    processes are possible that do not suppose the co-operative
    function of iconically and indexically functioning elements
    in the inferential process.  I'm questioning whether or not
    that is possible for a semiotically conceived logic.

I am merely assuming, along with Peirce, that there do exist symbols which
are "neither iconic nor indicative", more specifically, that such a symbol
does not "have an icon or an index incorporated into it", which means that
"the active law that it is" doesn't "require its interpretation to involve
the calling up of an image" or "require its interpretation to refer to the
actual surrounding circumstances of the occasion of its embodiment".

A symmetric relation like "co-operation" is a very different matter from
the asymmetric relations of "dependence", "incorporation", "involvement",
and "reference", and the examination of its relevance to symbol typology
has yet to be taken up here.

For instance, in the partly analogous typology of inference,
we can say with truth that the cycle of inquiry involves the
co-operation of abductive, deductive, and inductive reasoning,
and even that some forms of X-duction involve some components
of Y-duction, for X not equal to Y in the set {ab-, de-, in-}.
But if we deny that there is any form of X-duction which does
not involve Y-duction, then we have invoked either a reduction
of X to Y or an infinite regress.  I know some thinkers who do
claim such things, but C.S. Peirce is decidedly not one of them.

Jon Awbrey

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