Re: [ontolog-forum] On dyads and triads

[Simon Spero <sesuncedu@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:07 PM, John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I agree.  I used 'give' as an example to get away from the issues
of computation and to emphasize the physical participants.  Peirce,
by the way, also used 'give' as an example of an irreducible triad.

When you convert the triadic relation gives(x,y,z) to a conjunction
of three dyadic relations agent(w,x) & recipient(w,y) & theme(w,z),
there is still a triad in the graph.

By the way, Donald Davidson's "event semantics" corresponds to the
ontology of the graph on the right.  But Peirce was quantifying over
events long before Davidson -- and so was Whitehead, who made events
the fundamental elements of his ontology.

Following McCawley's analysis of english sentences without overt grammatical subjects*, I don't give a damn what Pierce said.  I won't give a damn tomorrow, which is another day, and I wouldn't give a damn were I north of the Mason-Dixon line.  

But if I were to give your argument proper consideration today, or alternatively, if  here and now I were to give proper consideration to your argument, I would possibly find in that world the logical form of my action to be: 

(and 

      (Giving #$Event1) 

  

      (and (Consideration #$Consideration1) 

              (proper #$Consideration1))

 

      (Argument #$Argument1) 

         

       (giver #$Event1 "SimonSpero")

       (recipient #$Event1 #$Argument1)

       (gift #$Event1 #$Consideration1)

       (dateOfEvent #$Event1 "March 29th 2013")

       (locationOfEvent #$Event1 "North Carolina, USA"))

As Davidson notes in TLFAS (following Kenny), if events are not reified, specifying the time of the giving would require a four place predicate; adding the location makes it a five place relationship.  

There is no obvious relationship that would allow one to infer from:

(giving "SimonSpero" #$Consideration #$Argument "March 29th 2013" "North Carolina, USA")

that someone in North Carolina gave proper consideration to an argument. Let alone that he did so reluctantly, facing towards a white dog. 

Other than notational convenience, why favor one  particular triad over all possible others, if all other attributes of the action must be predicated of a reification of that triad? 

Simon

*Cierce words might differ. 

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)