Re: Triadic Sign Relations
Jon Awbrey <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.inquiry |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Re: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2010-08/msg00119.html Peirce had a more even-handed grasp of comprehensions and extensions than most of us have been trained to treat them, indeed, he saw them as paired appendages of the whole body of information that a concept, symbol, or term embodies. A "comprehension" is a set of "intensions" (properties or qualities), while an "extension" is a set of "individuals". In his early papers Peirce described comprehensions as "logical composites" or "products" and extensions as "logical aggregates" or "sums", treating these two aspects of information in a symmetric manner with neither more basic than the other. Specialization is a process of determination like the one that Peirce describes as lessening the extension of a term up to a point. But if we add attributes to the comprehension data without narrowing the extension beyond that fixed point, then we are adding "superfluous comprehension", and the measure of that excess is called "information". In contemporary terms, we speak of "information transmission" as being related to "redundancy". Jon Awbrey -- inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1 oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey