Inquiry Into Inquiry • Discussion 9
• http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2023/08/19/inquiry-into-inquiry-discussion-9/

Re: Milo Gardner
• https://www.academia.edu/community/VBqzR5?c=Q4jJVy

MG: ❝Do you agree that Peirce was limited to bivalent logic?❞

Taking classical logic as a basis for reasoning is no more limiting than taking Dedekind cuts as a basis for constructing the real number line. For Peirce's relational approach to logic as semiotics the number of dimensions in a relation is more important than the number of values in each dimension. That is where 3 makes a difference over 2.

#Peirce #Logic #Inquiry #Inference #Information #InformationFusion #Semiotics
#CategoryTheory #Compositionality #RelationTheory #TriadicRelationIrreducibility

Inquiry Into Inquiry • Discussion 8
• http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2023/08/18/inquiry-into-inquiry-discussion-8/

Re: Milo Gardner
• https://www.academia.edu/community/Lbxjg5?c=yqXVog

MG:
❝Peirce sensed that bivalent syntax was superceded by trivalent syntax, but never resolved that nagging question.❞

My Comment —

The main thing is not a question of syntax but a question of the mathematical models we use to cope with object realities and real objectives (“pragmata”). Signs, syntax, and systems of representation can make a big difference in how well they represent the object domain and how well they serve the purpose at hand but they remain accessory to those objects and purposes.

#Peirce #Logic #Inquiry #Inference #Information #InformationFusion #Semiotics
#CategoryTheory #Compositionality #RelationTheory #TriadicRelationIrreducibility

Inquiry Into Inquiry • Discussion 7
• http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2023/08/17/inquiry-into-inquiry-discussion-7/

Dan Everett has prompted a number of discussions on Facebook recently which touch on core issues in Peirce's thought — but threads ravel on and fray so quickly in that medium one rarely gets a chance to fill out the warp. Not exactly at random, here's a loose thread I think may be worth the candle.

Re: Facebook • Daniel Everett
• https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0be89MXhhCm8rxahRn4PXif6HHSCmkdiUFfMZ3qS1mNqSzRzUWfqej5a8cyz8TcyJl&id=100093271525294

My Comment —

Compositionality started out as a well-defined concept, arising from the composition of mathematical functions, abstracted to the composition of arrows and functors in category theory, and generalized to the composition of binary, two-place, or dyadic relations. In terms of linguistic complexity it's associated with properly context-free languages. That all keeps compositionality on the dyadic side of the border in Peirce's universe. More lately the term has been volatilized to encompass almost any sort of information fusion, which is all well and good so long as folks make it clear what they are talking about, for which use the term “information fusion” would probably be sufficiently vague.

#Peirce #Logic #Inquiry #Inference #Information #InformationFusion #Semiotics
#CategoryTheory #Compositionality #RelationTheory #TriadicRelationIrreducibility

@Kihbernetics @Harishjosev

Had many discussions with Howard #Pattee 15 or 20 years ago on the old Organization, Complexity, Autonomy (OCA) List and later on the Peirce List, but almost always felt like we were talking past each other. Usually this happens due to a disconnect between dyadic and triadic frames of reference, often stemming from a failure to appreciate the consequences of #TriadicRelationIrreducibility, a core concept in #Peirce's theories of signs and inquiry.