#inquirydrivensystems — Public Fediverse posts

Reflection On Recursion • Discussion 1

Re: Reflection On Recursion • 1
Re: Laws of Form • John Mingers

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Reflection On Recursion • Discussion 1

Re: Reflection On Recursion • 1
Re: Laws of Form • John Mingers

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Reflection On Recursion • Discussion 1

Re: Reflection On Recursion • 1
Re: Laws of Form • John Mingers

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Reflection On Recursion • Discussion 1

Re: Reflection On Recursion • 1
Re: Laws of Form • John Mingers

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Reflection On Recursion • Discussion 1

Re: Reflection On Recursion • 1
Re: Laws of Form • John Mingers

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2) (3)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2) (3)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2) (3)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2) (3)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Inquiry Driven Systems • Inquiry Into Inquiry
• Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• The Phenomenology of Reflection
• Higher Order Sign Relations

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2) (3)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

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

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 14

Field Picture

Let us summarize the outlook on differential logic we’ve reached so far.  We’ve been considering a class of operators on universes of discourse, each of which takes us from considering one universe of discourse to considering a larger universe of discourse   An operator of that general type, namely, acts on each proposition of the source universe to produce a proposition of the target universe

The operators we’ve examined so far are the enlargement or shift operator and the difference operator   The operators and act on propositions in that is, propositions of the form which amount to propositions about the subject matter of and they produce propositions of the form which amount to propositions about specified collections of changes conceivably occurring in

At this point we find ourselves in need of visual representations, suitable arrays of concrete pictures to anchor our more earthy intuitions and help us keep our wits about us as we venture into ever more rarefied airs of abstraction.

One good picture comes to us by way of the field concept.  Given a space a field of a specified type over is formed by associating with each point of an object of type   If that sounds like the same thing as a function from to the space of things of type — it is nothing but — and yet it does seem helpful to vary the mental images and take advantage of the figures of speech most naturally springing to mind under the emblem of the field idea.

In the field picture a proposition becomes a scalar field, that is, a field of values in

For example, consider the logical conjunction shown in the following venn diagram.

Each of the operators takes us from considering propositions here viewed as scalar fields over to considering the corresponding differential fields over analogous to what in real analysis are usually called vector fields over

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 14

Field Picture

Let us summarize the outlook on differential logic we’ve reached so far.  We’ve been considering a class of operators on universes of discourse, each of which takes us from considering one universe of discourse to considering a larger universe of discourse   An operator of that general type, namely, acts on each proposition of the source universe to produce a proposition of the target universe

The operators we’ve examined so far are the enlargement or shift operator and the difference operator   The operators and act on propositions in that is, propositions of the form which amount to propositions about the subject matter of and they produce propositions of the form which amount to propositions about specified collections of changes conceivably occurring in

At this point we find ourselves in need of visual representations, suitable arrays of concrete pictures to anchor our more earthy intuitions and help us keep our wits about us as we venture into ever more rarefied airs of abstraction.

One good picture comes to us by way of the field concept.  Given a space a field of a specified type over is formed by associating with each point of an object of type   If that sounds like the same thing as a function from to the space of things of type — it is nothing but — and yet it does seem helpful to vary the mental images and take advantage of the figures of speech most naturally springing to mind under the emblem of the field idea.

In the field picture a proposition becomes a scalar field, that is, a field of values in

For example, consider the logical conjunction shown in the following venn diagram.

Each of the operators takes us from considering propositions here viewed as scalar fields over to considering the corresponding differential fields over analogous to what in real analysis are usually called vector fields over

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 14

Field Picture

Let us summarize the outlook on differential logic we’ve reached so far.  We’ve been considering a class of operators on universes of discourse, each of which takes us from considering one universe of discourse to considering a larger universe of discourse   An operator of that general type, namely, acts on each proposition of the source universe to produce a proposition of the target universe

The operators we’ve examined so far are the enlargement or shift operator and the difference operator   The operators and act on propositions in that is, propositions of the form which amount to propositions about the subject matter of and they produce propositions of the form which amount to propositions about specified collections of changes conceivably occurring in

At this point we find ourselves in need of visual representations, suitable arrays of concrete pictures to anchor our more earthy intuitions and help us keep our wits about us as we venture into ever more rarefied airs of abstraction.

One good picture comes to us by way of the field concept.  Given a space a field of a specified type over is formed by associating with each point of an object of type   If that sounds like the same thing as a function from to the space of things of type — it is nothing but — and yet it does seem helpful to vary the mental images and take advantage of the figures of speech most naturally springing to mind under the emblem of the field idea.

In the field picture a proposition becomes a scalar field, that is, a field of values in

For example, consider the logical conjunction shown in the following venn diagram.

Each of the operators takes us from considering propositions here viewed as scalar fields over to considering the corresponding differential fields over analogous to what in real analysis are usually called vector fields over

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 14

Field Picture

Let us summarize the outlook on differential logic we’ve reached so far.  We’ve been considering a class of operators on universes of discourse, each of which takes us from considering one universe of discourse to considering a larger universe of discourse   An operator of that general type, namely, acts on each proposition of the source universe to produce a proposition of the target universe

The operators we’ve examined so far are the enlargement or shift operator and the difference operator   The operators and act on propositions in that is, propositions of the form which amount to propositions about the subject matter of and they produce propositions of the form which amount to propositions about specified collections of changes conceivably occurring in

At this point we find ourselves in need of visual representations, suitable arrays of concrete pictures to anchor our more earthy intuitions and help us keep our wits about us as we venture into ever more rarefied airs of abstraction.

One good picture comes to us by way of the field concept.  Given a space a field of a specified type over is formed by associating with each point of an object of type   If that sounds like the same thing as a function from to the space of things of type — it is nothing but — and yet it does seem helpful to vary the mental images and take advantage of the figures of speech most naturally springing to mind under the emblem of the field idea.

In the field picture a proposition becomes a scalar field, that is, a field of values in

For example, consider the logical conjunction shown in the following venn diagram.

Each of the operators takes us from considering propositions here viewed as scalar fields over to considering the corresponding differential fields over analogous to what in real analysis are usually called vector fields over

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 14

Field Picture

Let us summarize the outlook on differential logic we’ve reached so far.  We’ve been considering a class of operators on universes of discourse, each of which takes us from considering one universe of discourse to considering a larger universe of discourse   An operator of that general type, namely, acts on each proposition of the source universe to produce a proposition of the target universe

The operators we’ve examined so far are the enlargement or shift operator and the difference operator   The operators and act on propositions in that is, propositions of the form which amount to propositions about the subject matter of and they produce propositions of the form which amount to propositions about specified collections of changes conceivably occurring in

At this point we find ourselves in need of visual representations, suitable arrays of concrete pictures to anchor our more earthy intuitions and help us keep our wits about us as we venture into ever more rarefied airs of abstraction.

One good picture comes to us by way of the field concept.  Given a space a field of a specified type over is formed by associating with each point of an object of type   If that sounds like the same thing as a function from to the space of things of type — it is nothing but — and yet it does seem helpful to vary the mental images and take advantage of the figures of speech most naturally springing to mind under the emblem of the field idea.

In the field picture a proposition becomes a scalar field, that is, a field of values in

For example, consider the logical conjunction shown in the following venn diagram.

Each of the operators takes us from considering propositions here viewed as scalar fields over to considering the corresponding differential fields over analogous to what in real analysis are usually called vector fields over

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 13

Transforms Expanded over Ordinary and Differential Variables

Two views of how the difference operator acts on the set of sixteen functions are shown below.  Table A5 shows the expansion of over the set of ordinary variables and Table A6 shows the expansion of over the set of differential variables.

Difference Map Expanded over Ordinary Variables

Difference Map Expanded over Differential Variables

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 13

Transforms Expanded over Ordinary and Differential Variables

Two views of how the difference operator acts on the set of sixteen functions are shown below.  Table A5 shows the expansion of over the set of ordinary variables and Table A6 shows the expansion of over the set of differential variables.

Difference Map Expanded over Ordinary Variables

Difference Map Expanded over Differential Variables

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 13

Transforms Expanded over Ordinary and Differential Variables

Two views of how the difference operator acts on the set of sixteen functions are shown below.  Table A5 shows the expansion of over the set of ordinary variables and Table A6 shows the expansion of over the set of differential variables.

Difference Map Expanded over Ordinary Variables

Difference Map Expanded over Differential Variables

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 13

Transforms Expanded over Ordinary and Differential Variables

Two views of how the difference operator acts on the set of sixteen functions are shown below.  Table A5 shows the expansion of over the set of ordinary variables and Table A6 shows the expansion of over the set of differential variables.

Difference Map Expanded over Ordinary Variables

Difference Map Expanded over Differential Variables

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Differential Logic • 13

Transforms Expanded over Ordinary and Differential Variables

Two views of how the difference operator acts on the set of sixteen functions are shown below.  Table A5 shows the expansion of over the set of ordinary variables and Table A6 shows the expansion of over the set of differential variables.

Difference Map Expanded over Ordinary Variables

Difference Map Expanded over Differential Variables

Resources

• Logic Syllabus
• Minimal Negation Operator
• Survey of Differential Logic
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs

cc: Academia.edu • Cybernetics • Laws of Form • Mathstodon (1) (2)
cc: Research Gate • Structural Modeling • Systems Science • Syscoi

Higher Order Sign Relations • Discussion 1
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2025/03/27/higher-order-sign-relations-discussion-1-a/

Re: FB | Charles S. Peirce Society • John Corcoran
• https://www.facebook.com/groups/peircesociety/posts/1768975423238442/

Questions about the proper treatment of use and mention from the standpoint of Peirce’s theory of signs came up recently in discussions on Facebook. In pragmatic semiotics the trade‑off between “signs-of-objects” and “signs-as-objects” opens up the wider space of Higher Order Sign Relations. In previous work on Inquiry Driven Systems I introduced the subject in the following way.

When interpreters reflect on their use of signs they require an appropriate technical language in which to pursue their reflections. They need signs referring to sign relations, signs referring to elements and components of sign relations, and signs referring to properties and classes of sign relations. The orders of signs developing as reflection evolves can be organized under the heading of “higher order signs” and the reflective sign relations involving them can be referred to as “higher order sign relations”.

References —

John Corcoran
• https://johncorcoran.academia.edu/

Schemata : The Concept of Schema in the History of Logic
• https://www.academia.edu/12691868/SCHEMATA_THE_CONCEPT_OF_SCHEMA_IN_THE_HISTORY_OF_LOGIC

Use And Mention, Use Without Mention, Mention Without Use
• https://www.academia.edu/s/ea64a3484e/schemata#comment_525151

Resources —

Higher Order Sign Relations
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Inquiry_Driven_Systems_%E2%80%A2_Part_12#Higher_Order_Sign_Relations

Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/02/28/survey-of-inquiry-driven-systems-6/

Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/01/26/survey-of-semiotics-semiosis-sign-relations-5/

#Peirce #Inquiry #Logic #Mathematics #Reflection
#Semiotics #SignRelations #HigherOrderSignRelations
#InquiryDrivenSystems #ReflectiveInterpretiveFrameworks
#Arithmetization #GödelNumbers #Quotation #UseAndMention

Higher Order Sign Relations • 1
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2025/03/22/higher-order-sign-relations-1-a/

Higher Order Sign Relations • Introduction —

When interpreters reflect on their use of signs they require an appropriate technical language in which to pursue their reflections. They need signs referring to sign relations, signs referring to elements and components of sign relations, and signs referring to properties and classes of sign relations. The orders of signs developing as reflection evolves can be organized under the heading of “higher order signs” and the reflective sign relations involving them can be referred to as “higher order sign relations”.

Some years ago I was formatting my old dissertation proposal on Inquiry Driven Systems for the web when the subject of “signs about signs” arose on the Peirce List. It called to mind the part of my document on Higher Order Sign Relations, on which basis Reflective Interpretive Frameworks are constructed, and the introduction to which begins as above.

Resources —

Inquiry Driven Systems
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Inquiry_Driven_Systems_%E2%80%A2_Overview

Reflective Interpretive Frameworks
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Inquiry_Driven_Systems_%E2%80%A2_Part_10#Reflective_Interpretive_Frameworks

Higher Order Sign Relations
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Inquiry_Driven_Systems_%E2%80%A2_Part_12#Higher_Order_Sign_Relations

Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/02/28/survey-of-inquiry-driven-systems-6/

Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/01/26/survey-of-semiotics-semiosis-sign-relations-5/

#Peirce #Inquiry #Logic #Mathematics #Reflection
#Semiotics #SignRelations #HigherOrderSignRelations
#InquiryDrivenSystems #ReflectiveInterpretiveFrameworks

Theory and Therapy of Representations • 5
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2025/02/25/theory-and-therapy-of-representations-5-b/

Re: R.J. Lipton and K.W. Regan • Legal Complexity
• https://rjlipton.com/2022/09/04/legal-complexity/

❝I do not pretend to understand the moral universe;
the arc is a long one, my eye reaches but little ways;
I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by
the experience of sight; I can divine it by conscience.
And from what I see I am sure it bends towards justice.❞

🙞 Theodore Parker
• https://web.archive.org/web/20200302045624/https://books.google.com/books?id=eHgYAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA48#v=onepage&q&f=false

The arc of the moral universe may bend toward justice — there's hope it will.
For the logic of laws to converge on justice may take some doing on our part.

Resources —

Survey of Cybernetics
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/01/25/survey-of-cybernetics-4/

Survey of Differential Logic
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/02/25/survey-of-differential-logic-7/

Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/02/28/survey-of-inquiry-driven-systems-6/

#AdaptiveSystems #Cybernetics #SystemsTheory #Governance #Democracy
#Plato #Peirce #MaxWeber #Accountability #Representation #Statistics
#Inquiry #InquiryDrivenSystems #Observation #Expectation #Intention

Theory and Therapy of Representations • 4
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2025/02/24/theory-and-therapy-of-representations-4-b/

Re: Ontolog Forum • Paola Di Maio
• https://groups.google.com/g/ontolog-forum/c/Ek_7cCCyFkQ/m/qI0kQv4UAgAJ

JA: What are the forces distorting our representations of what's observed, what's expected, and what's intended?

PDM: The short answer is — the force behind all distortions is our own unenlightened mind, and all the shortfalls this comes with.

I think that's true, we have to keep reflecting on the state of our personal enlightenments. If we can do that without losing our heads and our systems thinking caps, there will be much we can do to promote the general Enlightenment of the State.

On both personal and general grounds we have a stake in the projects of self‑governing systems — whether it is possible for them to exist and what it takes for them to thrive in given environments. Systems on that order have of course been studied from many points of view and at many levels of organization. Whether we address them under the names of adaptive, cybernetic, error-correcting, intelligent, or optimal control systems they all must be capable to some degree of learning, reasoning, and self‑guidance.

Resources —

Survey of Cybernetics
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/01/25/survey-of-cybernetics-4/

Survey of Differential Logic
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/02/25/survey-of-differential-logic-7/

Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/02/28/survey-of-inquiry-driven-systems-6/

#AdaptiveSystems #Cybernetics #SystemsTheory #Governance #Democracy
#Plato #Peirce #MaxWeber #Accountability #Representation #Statistics
#Inquiry #InquiryDrivenSystems #Observation #Expectation #Intention

Theory and Therapy of Representations • 3.2
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2025/02/23/theory-and-therapy-of-representations-3-b/

Scene 2. Theory and Therapy of Representations • 1
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2025/02/21/theory-and-therapy-of-representations-1-b/

Statistics were originally the data a ship of state needed for stationkeeping and staying on course. The Founders of the United States, like the Cybernauts of the Enlightenment they were, engineered a ship of state with checks and balances and error-controlled feedbacks for the sake of representing both reality and the will of the people. In that connection Max Weber saw how a state's accounting systems are intended as representations of realities its crew and passengers must observe or perish.

That brings us to Question 2 —

• What are the forces distorting our representations of what's observed, what's expected, and what's intended?

Resources ─

Survey of Cybernetics
• https://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2024/01/25/survey-of-cybernetics-4/

Pragmatic Theory Of Truth
• https://oeis.org/wiki/Pragmatic_Theory_Of_Truth

#AdaptiveSystems #Cybernetics #SystemsTheory #Governance #Democracy
#Plato #Peirce #MaxWeber #Accountability #Representation #Statistics
#Inquiry #InquiryDrivenSystems #Observation #Expectation #Intention