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

[Jon Awbrey]

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

FOLG.  Discussion Note 14

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

JA = Jon Awbrey
JR = Joe Ransdell

Re: FOLG-DIS 7.  http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-October/003143.html
In: FOLG-DIS.    http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2005-October/thread.html#3135

In part:

JA: One of the critical needs at this point is to nuance our
    comprehension of the varieties of iconic expression that
    are actually available, instead of taking them whole hog,
    that is to say, in a monolithic style.  But that demands
    the laying down of a bit more groundwork than we have at
    present before the issues can be discussed intelligently.
    So I will continue to attend to that task in tandem with
    replying to your remarks.

JR respomds:

JR: Since the questions I raised do not require for their answer
    a "nuanced comprehension of the varieties of iconic expression
    that are actually available", you could perhaps give a certain
    priority to the obligation to respond to them in a timely way.

Joe, Peirce List,

I suppose I could say that without a nuanced comprehension of
the varieties of iconic expression that are actually available
we can scarcely appreciate the need for a nuanced comprehension
of the varieties of iconic expression that are actually available,
but I think that I can now explain the need for such an appreciation
a little better than I could have a week ago.  I believe that the wish
to believe that all symbols involve icons and indices has elevated that
thesis to the status of a "deliberately unfalsifiable hypothesis" (DUH).
The unfalsifiability of the hypothesise turns on the fact that any two
things, say, a ripe tomato and the word "red", have some property in
common, say, their existence in the same universe or maybe just some
subset of possible universes, and so it cannot be denied that some
interpreter might take one, say, the ripe tomato, as an icon of
the other, say, the word "red".  It is useful to note the form
of logical tautology that is involved in this hypothesis, but
it loses further interest as a contingent truth in a science,
if indeed, semiotics is to become a science, whether formal
or empirical.  What remains of interest is "how" one thing
might be iconic of another, and I think that we will find
more fruitful, less vegetative study there.

Jon Awbrey

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