Re: SUO: Irreducible Triadicity
Matthew and Lee,
I agree with Lee's response:
>The "triadic" issue in the example you have given is whether we can
>analyze this example into triads which add up to the whole picture without
>any loss of logical content. In listing the attributes of the measurement
>problem you have already done this, if we can show that each element of
>the problem-- time of observation, measurement device, measurement scale,
>place of observation, observing subject, observed object etc.-- is
>reducible to the pattern O(for object)-R(for representamen)-I (for
>interpretant), where any R can also be seen as an O for some further
>O-R-I, and any I can be seen as an O or R for some further O-R-I, and any
>O may also be an R or an I, and so on, this whole business being the
>continuum of semiosis, infinitely extendable and infinitesimally
>refinable.
to Matthew's question:
>>... John has not responded to this example, which I repeat below.
>>
>> > MW: OK. In that case please show me how a measurement can be
>> > reduced to triads. A Measurement is an activity that:
>> >
>> > has a subject (the thing measured)
>> > an observer (doing the measuring)
>> > an instrument (e.g. thermometer)
>> > a measure (what about the thing is being measured, e.g. temperature)
>> > a result (the value e.g. 20)
>> > a Unit of Measure (e.g. Celsius)
>> > the time when the measurement was taken.
>>
>> I would be interested to see whether and how this can be reduced to triadic
>> or less ontologically dependent elements. If it can't, then there is at
>> least one case where this does not apply (which is enough) or perhaps as
Pat
>> has been suggesting there has been confusion between graph theory and
>> ontology.
The word "measurement" is ambiguous, since it can refer to
either the result (a sign) or the process (called "semiosis").
As Lee has said, this act of semiosis can be represented as
a triangle, which relates other signs (such as the marks
on a thermometer) to a sign that serves as a standard unit
to a number, which serves as a sign of the count of units
that represent the result. The activity of measuring is in
some situation (another triad) that relates the space-time
region to the activity taking place in that region.
The reason why I did not respond quickly is that doing all
the analysis and drawing all the triangles would take some
time. But to illustrate the kind of diagram I would draw,
if I took the time, see Section 2, "Signs of Signs", in my
paper "Ontology, Metadata, and Semiotics":
http://www.bestweb.net/~sowa/peirce/ontometa.htm
For another point of view, I suggest the lectures by
Joseph Esposito:
http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/epc/srb/cyber/espout.html
Following is the abstract of his lectures (which are all
available on line).
John Sowa
---------------------------------------------------------------
Peirce's Theory of Semiosis:
Toward a Logic of Mutual Affection
Instructor: Joseph L. Esposito
Course Description
This is a course on the development of Peirce's theory of signs (semiotics),
focusing on various writings of Peirce in
more or less chronological order. Just about as soon as Peirce began to philosophize
he was using the concept of a 'sign'
to help clarify his thoughts. The course begins with the philosophical tradition
Peirce as a young Harvard student
inherited and ends with our own speculations on Peirce's legacy. Our study is
guided by the concept of reciprocity in
Peirce's thought. Our aim is to attain a more philosophically refined understanding
of the concept and at the same time
acquire a deeper appreciation of Peirce's semiotics, and semiosis as a form
of reciprocity, as we review the various
formulations of the concept in his work. In refining the concept of reciprocity
illustrations of working uses of the concept
in a variety of disciplines will be sought for analysis and reflection. Thus,
the course will function as a true community
of inquirers believed by Peirce to be best way for knowledge to increase.