Re: Peircean Semiotics and Triadic Sign Relations

Re: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2012-June/003867.html

Peircers,

When I returned to grad school for the third time,
this time around in a systems engineering program,
I had in mind integrating many of my old projects
investigating the dynamics of learning, reasoning,
information, inquiry, and the media of signs that
give these processes their concrete embodiments.

Up until that time I don't believe I'd ever given much
thought to sign relations that had anything smaller than
infinite domains of objects, signs, and interpretant signs.
Countably infinite domains are what comes natural in logic,
since that is the norm for the formal languages that it uses.
Continuous domains come first to mind when turning to physical
systems, despite the fact that quantum systems will eventually
enter the fray.

So it was a bit of a novelty to me when my advisor, following the
motto of engineers the world over to "Keep It Simple, Stupid!" --
affectionately known by the acronym KISS -- asked me to construct
the simplest, non-trivial, finite example of a sign relation that
I could possibly devise.  The outcome of that exercise I wrote up
in the following primer on sign relations.

http://mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry_Driven_Systems_:_Part_1#1.3.4.2._Sign_Relations_:_A_Primer

http://mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry_Driven_Systems_:_Part_1#1.3.4.3._Semiotic_Equivalence_Relations

Regards,

Jon

-- 

academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey
oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache