Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 3

Re: Peirce ListPhyllis Chiasson

A more complete excerpt and the translator’s notes are very helpful here.

A probability (εικος) is not the same as a sign (σηµειον).  The former is a generally accepted premiss ;  for that which people know to happen or not to happen, or to be or not to be, usually in a particular way, is a probability :  e.g., that the envious are malevolent or that those who are loved are affectionate.  A sign, however, means a demonstrative premiss which is necessary or generally accepted.1  That which coexists with something else, or before or after whose happening something else has happened, is a sign of that something’s having happened or being.

An enthymeme is a syllogism from probabilities or signs ;  and a sign can be taken in three ways — in just as many ways as there are of taking the middle term in the several figures :  either as in the first figure or as in the second or as in the third.

  • E.g., the proof that a woman is pregnant because she has milk is by the first figure ;  for the middle term is ‘having milk’.  A stands for ‘pregnant’, B for ‘having milk’, and C for ‘woman’.
  • The proof that the wise are good because Pittacus was good is by the third figure.  A stands for ‘good’, B for ‘the wise’, and C for Pittacus.  Then it is true to predicate both A and B of C ;  only we do not state the latter, because we know it, whereas we formally assume the former.
  • The proof that a woman is pregnant because she is sallow is intended to be by the middle figure ;  for since sallowness is a characteristic of woman in pregnancy, and is associated with this particular woman, they suppose that she is proved to be pregnant.  A stands for ‘sallowness’, B for ‘being pregnant’, C for ‘woman’.

If only one premiss is stated, we get only a sign ;  but if the other premiss is assumed as well, we get a syllogism,2 e.g., that Pittacus is high-minded, because those who love honour are high-minded, and Pittacus loves honour ;  or again that the wise are good, because Pittacus is good and also wise.

In this way syllogisms can be effected ;  but whereas a syllogism in the first figure cannot be refuted if it is true, since it is universal, a syllogism in the last figure can be refuted even if the conclusion is true, because the syllogism is neither universal nor relevant to our purpose.3  For if Pittacus is good, it is not necessary for this reason that all other wise men are good.  A syllogism in the middle figure is always and in every way refutable, since we never get a syllogism with the terms in this relation4 ;  for it does not necessarily follow, if a pregnant woman is sallow, and this woman is sallow, that she is pregnant.  Thus truth can be found in all signs, but they differ in the ways which have been described.

We must either classify signs in this way, and regard their middle term as an index (τεκµηριον)5 (for the name ‘index’ is given to that which causes us to know, and the middle term is especially of this nature), or describe the arguments drawn from the extremes6 as ‘signs’, and that which is drawn from the middle as an ‘index’.  For the conclusion which is reached through the first figure is most generally accepted and most true.  (Aristotle, Prior Analytics 2.27, 70a3–70b6).

Translator’s Notes

  • If referable to one phenomenon only, a sign has objective necessity ;  if to more than one, its value is a matter of opinion.
  • Strictly an enthymeme.
  • If the signs of an enthymeme in the first figure are true, the conclusion is inevitable.  Aristotle does not mean that the conclusion is universal, but that the universality of the major premiss implies the validity of the minor and conclusion.  The example (<all> those who have honour, etc.) quoted for the third figure contains no universal premiss or sign, and fails to establish a universal conclusion.
  • i.e. when both premisses are affirmative.
  • Signs may be classified as irrefutable (1st figure) and refutable (2nd and 3rd figures), and the name ‘index’ may be attached to their middle terms, either in all figures or (more probably) only in the first, where the middle is distinctively middle.
  • Alternatively the name ‘sign’ may be restricted to the 2nd and 3rd figures, and may be replaced by ‘index’ in the first.
  • Reference

    • Aristotle, “Prior Analytics”, Hugh Tredennick (trans.), pp. 181–531 in Aristotle, Volume 1, Loeb Classical Library, William Heinemann, London, UK, 1938.

    Resource

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of FormMathstodon
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Analogy #Aristotle #CSPeirce #IconIndexSymbol #Induction #Inquiry #Likelihood #LikelyStory #Likeness #Logic #Mathematics #Probability #ProbableReasoning #Semiotics #SignRelations
    Discussion of the philosophy of Charles Peirce

    Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 2

    Re: Peirce ListPhyllis Chiasson

    I’m still a bit fuzzy on how Aristotle’s account relates to Peirce’s usage, though I’m pretty sure Peirce must have taken Aristotle’s usage into account, but it does seem that Aristotle drew some sort of distinction here, using a term “tekmerion” which gets translated as “index” to make the following remark later on in that chapter.

    We must either classify signs in this way, and regard their middle term as an index [τεκµηριον] (for the name ‘index’ is given to that which causes us to know, and the middle term is especially of this nature), or describe the arguments drawn from the extremes as ‘signs’, and that which is drawn from the middle as an ‘index’.  For the conclusion which is reached through the first figure is most generally accepted and most true.  (Aristotle, Prior Analytics, 2.27.70b1–6).

    Reference

    • Aristotle, “Prior Analytics”, Hugh Tredennick (trans.), pp. 181–531 in Aristotle, Volume 1, Loeb Classical Library, William Heinemann, London, UK, 1938.

    Resource

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of FormMathstodon
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Analogy #Aristotle #CSPeirce #IconIndexSymbol #Induction #Inquiry #Likelihood #LikelyStory #Likeness #Logic #Mathematics #Probability #ProbableReasoning #Semiotics #SignRelations
    Discussion of the philosophy of Charles Peirce

    Icon, Likeness, Likely Story, Likelihood, Probability • 1

    Here’s a likely locus classicus for “icon” in its logical sense —

    A probability (εικος) is not the same as a sign (σηµειον).  The former is a generally accepted premiss;  for that which people know to happen or not to happen, or to be or not to be, usually in a particular way, is a probability:  e.g., that the envious are malevolent or that those who are loved are affectionate.  A sign, however, means a demonstrative premiss which is necessary or generally accepted.  That which coexists with something else, or before or after whose happening something else has happened, is a sign of that something’s having happened or being.  (Aristotle, Prior Analytics, 2.27.70a3–10).

    Reference

    • Aristotle, “Prior Analytics”, Hugh Tredennick (trans.), pp. 181–531 in Aristotle, Volume 1, Loeb Classical Library, William Heinemann, London, UK, 1938.

    Resource

    Related Discussion

    #Analogy #Aristotle #CSPeirce #IconIndexSymbol #Induction #Inquiry #Likelihood #LikelyStory #Likeness #Logic #Mathematics #Probability #ProbableReasoning #Semiotics #SignRelations

    Reflection On Recursion • Discussion 1

    Re: Reflection On Recursion • 1
    Re: Laws of FormJohn Mingers

    JM: This is a very important and interesting topic.  I think you should consider the relationship to self‑reference, indeed are they really the same thing?

    Also the work of Maturana and Varela on autopoiesis and the neurophysiology of cognition which also has recursion at its heart.

    Thanks, John.  Yes, we certainly find the whole array of self concepts coming into play here — selfhood, autopoiesis or self creation, self reference and self transformation, just to name a few.  But one thing I need to emphasize from the start is how radically different such concepts appear when viewed under x‑rays of Peirce’s pragmatic semiotics.

    I forget where I first heard it, but it’s fairly common observation that the persistence of a recurring problem is a symptom of how unlikely it is to be solved in the paradigm where it keeps occurring.

    After a while, it simply becomes time to change the paradigm …

    Just by way of a first example, take the very idea of “self‑reference”.  The moment we place it in the medium of triadic sign relations we realize signs do not refer to anything at all except insofar as an interpreter refers them.  And when we think to ask, “What is this that we call an interpreter?”, the pragmatic theory of signs tells us we do not know when we turn out the light but under the x‑ray of the pragmatic maxim the sum of its effects is effectively modeled by an extended triadic sign relation.

    Everything I’ll be working at here will be done within a framework like that.

    Regards,
    Jon

    Resources

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of FormMathstodon
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Arithmetization #CSPeirce #GödelNumbers #HigherOrderSignRelations #InquiryDrivenSystems #InquiryIntoInquiry #Logic #Mathematics #Quotation #Recursion #Reflection #ReflectiveInterpretiveFrameworks #Semiotics #SignRelations #TriadicRelations #UseAndMention #Visualization
    Reflection On Recursion • 1

    Ongoing conversations with Dan Everett on Facebook have me backtracking to recurring questions about the relationship between formal language theory (as I once learned it) and the properties of nat…

    Inquiry Into Inquiry

    Reflection On Recursion • 4

    A feature of special note in the recursion diagram is the function traversing the square from one triadic node to the other.  It preserves an image of the object all the while its precedent is being retrieved and processed — thus it injects a measure of parallel process and a modicum of extra memory over and above that afforded by the serial composition of functions.

    Resources

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of FormMathstodon
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Arithmetization #CSPeirce #GödelNumbers #HigherOrderSignRelations #InquiryDrivenSystems #InquiryIntoInquiry #Logic #Mathematics #Quotation #Recursion #Reflection #ReflectiveInterpretiveFrameworks #Semiotics #SignRelations #TriadicRelations #UseAndMention #Visualization

    Reflection On Recursion • 3

    One other feature of syntactic recursion deserves to be brought into higher relief.  Evidence of it can be found in the recursion diagram by examining the places where three paths meet.  On the descending side there is the point where three paths diverge.  On the ascending side there is the point where the middlemost of the three divergent paths joins the upshot arrow in medias res.

    The arrows of the diagram represent functions, a species of dyadic relations, but nodes of degree three signify aspects of triadic relations somewhere in the mix.

    • The three arrows from the initial node represent a function such that
    • The three arrows at the penultimate node represent a function such that

    For the sake of a first approach, many questions about triadic relations which might arise at this point can be safely left to later discussions, since the current level of generality is comprehensible enough in functional terms.

    Resources

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of FormMathstodon
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Arithmetization #CSPeirce #GödelNumbers #HigherOrderSignRelations #InquiryDrivenSystems #InquiryIntoInquiry #Logic #Mathematics #Quotation #Recursion #Reflection #ReflectiveInterpretiveFrameworks #Semiotics #SignRelations #TriadicRelations #UseAndMention #Visualization

    Reflection On Recursion • 2

    Turning to the form of a simple recursive function the clause we used to define it earns the title of “syntactic recursion” due to the way the function name occurring in the defined phrase re‑occurs in the defining phrase

    It needs to be clear there is no circle in the definition — each instance of the type is defined in terms of an instance one step simpler until the base case is reached and fixed by fiat.  Instead of a circle then we have two gyres, the gyre down via the predecessor function and the gyre up via the modifier function

    Resources

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2) (3)
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Arithmetization #CSPeirce #GödelNumbers #HigherOrderSignRelations #InquiryDrivenSystems #InquiryIntoInquiry #Logic #Mathematics #Quotation #Recursion #Reflection #ReflectiveInterpretiveFrameworks #Semiotics #SignRelations #TriadicRelations #UseAndMention #Visualization

    Differential Logic • 18

    Tangent and Remainder Maps

    If we follow the classical line which singles out linear functions as ideals of simplicity then we may complete the analytic series of the proposition in the following way.

    The next venn diagram shows the differential proposition we get by extracting the linear approximation to the difference map at each cell or point of the universe   What results is the logical analogue of what would ordinarily be called the differential of but since the adjective differential is being attached to just about everything in sight the alternative name tangent map is commonly used for whenever it’s necessary to single it out.


    To be clear about what’s being indicated here, it’s a visual way of summarizing the following data.

    To understand the extended interpretations, that is, the conjunctions of basic and differential features which are being indicated here, it may help to note the following equivalences.

    Capping the analysis of the proposition in terms of succeeding orders of linear propositions, the final venn diagram of the series shows the remainder map which happens to be linear in pairs of variables.


    Reading the arrows off the map produces the following data.

    In short, is a constant field, having the value at each cell.

    Resources

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Amphecks #Animata #BooleanAlgebra #BooleanFunctions #CSPeirce #CactusGraphs #Change #Cybernetics #DifferentialCalculus #DifferentialLogic #DiscreteDynamics #EquationalInference #FunctionalLogic #GradientDescent #GraphTheory #InquiryDrivenSystems #Logic #LogicalGraphs #Mathematics #MinimalNegationOperators #PropositionalCalculus #Time #Visualization
    Differential Logic • Part 3 - OeisWiki

    Differential Logic • 17

    Enlargement and Difference Maps

    Continuing with the example the following venn diagram shows the enlargement or shift map in the same style of field picture we drew for the tacit extension


    A very important conceptual transition has just occurred here, almost tacitly, as it were.  Generally speaking, having a set of mathematical objects of compatible types, in this case the two differential fields and both of the type is very useful, because it allows us to consider those fields as integral mathematical objects which can be operated on and combined in the ways we usually associate with algebras.

    In the present case one notices the tacit extension and the enlargement are in a sense dual to each other.  The tacit extension indicates all the arrows out of the region where is true and the enlargement indicates all the arrows into the region where is true.  The only arc they have in common is the no‑change loop at   If we add the two sets of arcs in mod 2 fashion then the loop of multiplicity 2 zeroes out, leaving the 6 arrows of shown in the following venn diagram.


    Resources

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Amphecks #Animata #BooleanAlgebra #BooleanFunctions #CSPeirce #CactusGraphs #Change #Cybernetics #DifferentialCalculus #DifferentialLogic #DiscreteDynamics #EquationalInference #FunctionalLogic #GradientDescent #GraphTheory #InquiryDrivenSystems #Logic #LogicalGraphs #Mathematics #MinimalNegationOperators #PropositionalCalculus #Time #Visualization
    Differential Logic • Part 3 - OeisWiki

    Differential Logic • 15

    Differential Fields

    The structure of a differential field may be described as follows.  With each point of there is associated an object of the following type:  a proposition about changes in that is, a proposition   In that frame of reference, if is the universe generated by the set of coordinate propositions then is the differential universe generated by the set of differential propositions   The differential propositions and may thus be interpreted as indicating and respectively.

    A differential operator of the first order type we are currently considering, takes a proposition and gives back a differential proposition   In the field view of the scene, we see the proposition as a scalar field and we see the differential proposition as a vector field, specifically, a field of propositions about contemplated changes in

    The field of changes produced by on is shown in the following venn diagram.


    The differential field specifies the changes which need to be made from each point of in order to reach one of the models of the proposition that is, in order to satisfy the proposition

    The field of changes produced by on is shown in the following venn diagram.


    The differential field specifies the changes which need to be made from each point of in order to feel a change in the felt value of the field

    Resources

    cc: Academia.eduCyberneticsLaws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
    cc: Research GateStructural ModelingSystems ScienceSyscoi

    #Amphecks #Animata #BooleanAlgebra #BooleanFunctions #CSPeirce #CactusGraphs #Change #Cybernetics #DifferentialCalculus #DifferentialLogic #DiscreteDynamics #EquationalInference #FunctionalLogic #GradientDescent #GraphTheory #InquiryDrivenSystems #Logic #LogicalGraphs #Mathematics #MinimalNegationOperators #PropositionalCalculus #Time #Visualization
    Differential Logic • Part 3 - OeisWiki