ONT Re: Zeroth Order Ontology
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
ZOO. Discussion Note 19
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Murray,
I have come to regard what is often called the "dual sole sufficiency"
of the amphecks with regard to ZOL as a kind of "logical taste test",
like that chemical that some people have the gene to taste and some
do not. When I first encountered this fact of logic, I felt as if
I were grokking in the very font of the subject, but I've read it
described in print, by thinkers I'd've thought should know better,
as a "technical curiosity, bearing no substantive logical import".
Naturally I treat my sense of taste as the normal one, and view
their dissapience as abnormal, deviant, or even a bit perverse.
But as it is no doubt due to a genetic defect or a pernicious
mutation, I empathize that they probably just cannot help it.
So return again to Peirce's precursory text on the subject,
and let me know if there's any obstacle that you have to
appreciating the cornucopious bounty of logical treats
that all sapient creatures of good logical taste have
but to sample in order to enjoy there:
ZOL 13. http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/msg05184.html
I would not say that it's the sine qua non prerequisite of
proceeding with this line of inquiry, but it would be good
to discuss any thing that troubles you about Peirce's text.
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o