[Inquiry] Utter Indetermination

[Jon Awbrey]

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

UI.  Note 1

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

Among the forms of utter indetermination that undertermine our itterances
there is the circumstance that the "Sheet of Assertion" (SA) -- and so it
goes with any symbol -- can't determine its own interpretation as true or
false except in consequence of its interpreters guessing whether it is to
be read as entitative or existential, signifying "false" under the former
and "true" under the latter.  This has many consequences of its own, some
of them indexing the fact that whatever form these icons are iconic of is
more abstract than a rigid parallelism between semantic and signal values.
The nature of analogies or icons is such that a whole system of relations
among logical entities gets mapped into a whole system of relations among
syntactic entities, without necessarily determining a unique mapping from
entity to entity.  As evident in the simplest case of analogy, proportion,
or ratio, we know that a:b :: c:d does not determine that a = c and b = d.
In the case of Peirce's logical graphs, we observe a form of duality that
reminds us of the duality between points and lines in projective geometry.

Jon Awbrey

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