o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o (01)
LAFS. Note 5 (02)
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o (03)
I have been saying that C.S. Peirce defined logic as "formal semiotic",
that is, a formal theory of signs, and I've been saying also that this
conception of logic develops a classical line of thinking that regards
logic among the normative sciences. A normative science may be viewed
as a "design science", an inquiry into what ought to be, or what ought
to be done in order to achieve a given set of aims, as contrasted with
a descriptive science, that only asks what is. (04)
The thing that might trip a reader up at this point is Peirce's use of
the word "formal", a word that was wrung through so many strange turns
of meaning during the 20th Century that Peirce could have known not of. (05)
And I can see from several other discussions hereabouts that this very
word "formal" has already become the bone of contention and the source
of confusion that might have been predicted from its bedeviled history. (06)
So I will work on clearing that up over the weekend ... (07)
Jon Awbrey (08)
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
¢iare: http://www.centiare.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
getwiki: http://www.getwiki.net/-UserTalk:Jon_Awbrey
zhongwen wp: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
http://www.altheim.com/ceryle/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JonAwbrey
wp review: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=398
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o (09)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (010)
|