Difference between revisions of "Semeiotic"

MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Friday November 29, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to search
(<font size="3">☞</font> This page belongs to resource collections on Logic and Inquiry.)
(update)
 
(11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<font size="3">&#9758;</font> This page belongs to resource collections on [[Logic Live|Logic]] and [[Inquiry Live|Inquiry]].
 
<font size="3">&#9758;</font> This page belongs to resource collections on [[Logic Live|Logic]] and [[Inquiry Live|Inquiry]].
  
−
'''''Semeiotic''''' is one of the terms that [[Charles Sanders Peirce]] used to describe his theory of [[triadic relation|triadic]] [[sign relation]]s, along with ''semiotic'' and the plural variants of both terms.  As a practical matter, the form ''semeiotic'' is useful in distinguishing Peirce's theory, since it is less often used by other writers to describe their particular approaches to the subject matter.
+
'''''Semeiotic''''' is one of the terms that Charles Sanders Peirce used to describe his theory of [[triadic relation|triadic]] [[sign relations]], along with ''semiotic'' and the plural variants of both terms.  The form ''semeiotic'' is often used to distinguish Peirce's theory, since it is less often used by other writers to denote their particular approaches to the subject.
  
 
==Types of signs==
 
==Types of signs==
  
−
There are three principal ways that a sign can denote its objects.  These are usually described as ''kinds'', ''species'', or ''types'' of signs, but it is important to recognize that these are not [[ontology|ontological]] species, that is, they are not mutually exclusive features of description, since the same thing can be a sign in several different ways.
+
There are three principal ways that a sign can denote its objects.  These are usually described as ''kinds'', ''species'', or ''types'' of signs, but it is important to recognize that these are not ontological species, that is, they are not mutually exclusive features of description, since the same thing can be a sign in several different ways.
  
 
Beginning very roughly, the three main ways of being a sign can be described as follows:
 
Beginning very roughly, the three main ways of being a sign can be described as follows:
Line 19: Line 19:
 
{| align="center" cellpadding="8" width="90%"
 
{| align="center" cellpadding="8" width="90%"
 
|
 
|
−
<p>In the first place there are likenesses or copies — such as ''statues'', ''pictures'', ''emblems'', ''hieroglyphics'', and the like.  Such representations stand for their objects only so far as they have an actual resemblance to them — that is agree with them in some characters.  The peculiarity of such representations is that they do not determine their objects — they stand for anything more or less;  for they stand for whatever they resemble and they resemble everything more or less.</p>
+
<p>In the first place there are likenesses or copies &mdash; such as ''statues'', ''pictures'', ''emblems'', ''hieroglyphics'', and the like.  Such representations stand for their objects only so far as they have an actual resemblance to them &mdash; that is agree with them in some characters.  The peculiarity of such representations is that they do not determine their objects &mdash; they stand for anything more or less;  for they stand for whatever they resemble and they resemble everything more or less.</p>
  
 
<p>The second kind of representations are such as are set up by a convention of men or a decree of God.  Such are ''tallies'', ''proper names'', &c.  The peculiarity of these ''conventional signs'' is that they represent no character of their objects.  Likenesses denote nothing in particular;  ''conventional signs'' connote nothing in particular.</p>
 
<p>The second kind of representations are such as are set up by a convention of men or a decree of God.  Such are ''tallies'', ''proper names'', &c.  The peculiarity of these ''conventional signs'' is that they represent no character of their objects.  Likenesses denote nothing in particular;  ''conventional signs'' connote nothing in particular.</p>
  
−
<p>The third and last kind of representations are ''symbols'' or general representations.  They connote attributes and so connote them as to determine what they denote.  To this class belong all ''words'' and all ''conceptions''.  Most combinations of words are also symbols.  A proposition, an argument, even a whole book may be, and should be, a single symbol.  (Peirce 1866, "Lowell Lecture 7", CE 1, 467–468).</p>
+
<p>The third and last kind of representations are ''symbols'' or general representations.  They connote attributes and so connote them as to determine what they denote.  To this class belong all ''words'' and all ''conceptions''.  Most combinations of words are also symbols.  A proposition, an argument, even a whole book may be, and should be, a single symbol.  (Peirce 1866, &ldquo;Lowell Lecture 7&rdquo;, CE&nbsp;1, 467&ndash;468).</p>
 
|}
 
|}
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
  
−
* [[Charles Sanders Peirce|Peirce, C.S.]], [[Charles Sanders Peirce (Bibliography)|Bibliography]].
+
* Peirce, C.S., [[Charles Sanders Peirce (Bibliography)|Bibliography]].
  
−
* Peirce, C.S., ''Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Volume&nbsp;1, 1857–1866'', Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1982.  Cited as CE&nbsp;1.
+
* Peirce, C.S., ''Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Volume&nbsp;1, 1857&ndash;1866'', Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1982.  Cited as CE&nbsp;1.
  
−
* Peirce, C.S. (1865), "On the Logic of Science", Harvard University Lectures, CE&nbsp;1, 161–302.
+
* Peirce, C.S. (1865), "On the Logic of Science", Harvard University Lectures, CE&nbsp;1, 161&ndash;302.
  
−
* Peirce, C.S. (1866), "The Logic of Science, or, Induction and Hypothesis", Lowell Institute Lectures, CE&nbsp;1, 357–504.
+
* Peirce, C.S. (1866), "The Logic of Science, or, Induction and Hypothesis", Lowell Institute Lectures, CE&nbsp;1, 357&ndash;504.
  
−
==Further reading==
+
==Readings==
  
−
* Awbrey, Jon, and Awbrey, Susan (1995), "Interpretation as Action : The Risk of Inquiry", ''Inquiry : Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines'' 15, 40–52.  [http://www.chss.montclair.edu/inquiry/fall95/awbrey.html Eprint].
+
* Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (1995), &ldquo;Interpretation as Action : The Risk of Inquiry&rdquo;, ''Inquiry : Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines'' 15(1), pp. 40&ndash;52.  [http://web.archive.org/web/19970626071826/http://chss.montclair.edu/inquiry/fall95/awbrey.html Archive].  [http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey/Papers/1302117/Interpretation_as_Action_The_Risk_of_Inquiry Online].
  
−
==See also==
+
==Resources==
 +
 
 +
* [http://vectors.usc.edu/thoughtmesh/publish/142.php Semeiotic &rarr; ThoughtMesh]
 +
 
 +
* Bergman & Paavola (eds.), ''Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms'', [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html Webpage]
 +
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/semeiotic.html Semeiotic]''
 +
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/icon.html Icon]''
 +
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/index2.html Index]''
 +
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/symbol.html Symbol]''
 +
 
 +
==Syllabus==
 +
 
 +
===Focal nodes===
 +
 
 +
* [[Inquiry Live]]
 +
* [[Logic Live]]
 +
 
 +
===Peer nodes===
 +
 
 +
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Semeiotic Semeiotic @ InterSciWiki]
 +
* [http://mywikibiz.com/Semeiotic Semeiotic @ MyWikiBiz]
 +
* [http://ref.subwiki.org/wiki/Semeiotic Semeiotic @ Subject Wikis]
 +
* [http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Semeiotic Semeiotic @ Wikiversity]
 +
* [http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Semeiotic Semeiotic @ Wikiversity Beta]
 +
 
 +
===Logical operators===
  
 
{{col-begin}}
 
{{col-begin}}
 
{{col-break}}
 
{{col-break}}
−
* [[Logic of information]]
+
* [[Exclusive disjunction]]
 +
* [[Logical conjunction]]
 +
* [[Logical disjunction]]
 +
* [[Logical equality]]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Logical implication]]
 +
* [[Logical NAND]]
 +
* [[Logical NNOR]]
 +
* [[Logical negation|Negation]]
 +
{{col-end}}
 +
 
 +
===Related topics===
 +
 
 +
{{col-begin}}
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Ampheck]]
 +
* [[Boolean domain]]
 +
* [[Boolean function]]
 +
* [[Boolean-valued function]]
 +
* [[Differential logic]]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Logical graph]]
 +
* [[Minimal negation operator]]
 +
* [[Multigrade operator]]
 +
* [[Parametric operator]]
 +
* [[Peirce's law]]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Propositional calculus]]
 +
* [[Sole sufficient operator]]
 +
* [[Truth table]]
 +
* [[Universe of discourse]]
 +
* [[Zeroth order logic]]
 +
{{col-end}}
 +
 
 +
===Relational concepts===
 +
 
 +
{{col-begin}}
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Continuous predicate]]
 +
* [[Hypostatic abstraction]]
 
* [[Logic of relatives]]
 
* [[Logic of relatives]]
 +
* [[Logical matrix]]
 +
{{col-break}}
 
* [[Relation (mathematics)|Relation]]
 
* [[Relation (mathematics)|Relation]]
 +
* [[Relation composition]]
 +
* [[Relation construction]]
 +
* [[Relation reduction]]
 
{{col-break}}
 
{{col-break}}
−
* [[Semiosis]]
+
* [[Relation theory]]
−
* [[Semiotics]]
+
* [[Relative term]]
−
* [[Semiotic information theory|Semiotic information]]
 
−
{{col-break}}
 
−
* [[Sign (semiotics)|Sign]]
 
 
* [[Sign relation]]
 
* [[Sign relation]]
 
* [[Triadic relation]]
 
* [[Triadic relation]]
 
{{col-end}}
 
{{col-end}}
  
−
==External links==
+
===Information, Inquiry===
  
−
* [http://vectors.usc.edu/thoughtmesh/publish/142.php Semeiotic → ThoughtMesh]
+
{{col-begin}}
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Inquiry]]
 +
* [[Dynamics of inquiry]]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Semeiotic]]
 +
* [[Logic of information]]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Descriptive science]]
 +
* [[Normative science]]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [[Pragmatic maxim]]
 +
* [[Truth theory]]
 +
{{col-end}}
 +
 
 +
===Related articles===
  
−
* Bergman & Paavola (eds.), ''Commens Dictionary of Peirce's Terms'', [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html Webpage]
+
{{col-begin}}
−
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/semeiotic.html Semeiotic]''
+
{{col-break}}
−
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/icon.html Icon]''
+
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Semiotic_Information Semiotic Information]
−
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/index2.html Index]''
+
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Futures_Of_Logical_Graphs Futures Of Logical Graphs]
−
** ''[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/symbol.html Symbol]''
+
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Propositional_Equation_Reasoning_Systems Propositional Equation Reasoning Systems]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Differential_Logic_:_Introduction Differential Logic : Introduction]
 +
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Differential_Propositional_Calculus Differential Propositional Calculus]
 +
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Differential_Logic_and_Dynamic_Systems_2.0 Differential Logic and Dynamic Systems]
 +
{{col-break}}
 +
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Introduction_to_Inquiry_Driven_Systems Introduction to Inquiry Driven Systems]
 +
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Prospects_for_Inquiry_Driven_Systems Prospects for Inquiry Driven Systems]
 +
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Inquiry_Driven_Systems Inquiry Driven Systems : Inquiry Into Inquiry]
 +
{{col-end}}
 +
 
 +
==Document history==
 +
 
 +
Portions of the above article were adapted from the following sources under the [[GNU Free Documentation License]], under other applicable licenses, or by permission of the copyright holders.
  
−
<br><sharethis />
+
* [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Semeiotic Semeiotic], [http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/ InterSciWiki]
 +
* [http://mywikibiz.com/Semeiotic Semeiotic], [http://mywikibiz.com/ MyWikiBiz]
 +
* [http://semanticweb.org/wiki/Semeiotic Semeiotic], [http://semanticweb.org/ Semantic Web]
 +
* [http://ref.subwiki.org/wiki/Semeiotic Semeiotic], [http://ref.subwiki.org/ Subject Wikis]
 +
* [http://vectors.usc.edu/thoughtmesh/publish/142.php Semeiotic], [http://vectors.usc.edu/thoughtmesh/ ThoughtMesh]
 +
* [http://wikinfo.org/w/index.php/Semeiotic Semeiotic], [http://wikinfo.org/w/ Wikinfo]
 +
* [http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Semeiotic Semeiotic], [http://en.wikiversity.org/ Wikiversity]
 +
* [http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Semeiotic Semeiotic], [http://beta.wikiversity.org/ Wikiversity Beta]
 +
* [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semeiotic&oldid=246563989 Semeiotic], [http://en.wikipedia.org/ Wikipedia]
  
−
[[Category:Inquiry]]
 
−
[[Category:Peer Educational Resource]]
 
 
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
 
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
 +
[[Category:Charles Sanders Peirce]]
 
[[Category:Critical Thinking]]
 
[[Category:Critical Thinking]]
 
[[Category:Cybernetics]]
 
[[Category:Cybernetics]]
Line 77: Line 178:
 
[[Category:Hermeneutics]]
 
[[Category:Hermeneutics]]
 
[[Category:Information Systems]]
 
[[Category:Information Systems]]
 +
[[Category:Inquiry]]
 
[[Category:Intelligence Amplification]]
 
[[Category:Intelligence Amplification]]
 
[[Category:Learning Organizations]]
 
[[Category:Learning Organizations]]

Latest revision as of 20:54, 3 November 2015

☞ This page belongs to resource collections on Logic and Inquiry.

Semeiotic is one of the terms that Charles Sanders Peirce used to describe his theory of triadic sign relations, along with semiotic and the plural variants of both terms. The form semeiotic is often used to distinguish Peirce's theory, since it is less often used by other writers to denote their particular approaches to the subject.

Types of signs

There are three principal ways that a sign can denote its objects. These are usually described as kinds, species, or types of signs, but it is important to recognize that these are not ontological species, that is, they are not mutually exclusive features of description, since the same thing can be a sign in several different ways.

Beginning very roughly, the three main ways of being a sign can be described as follows:

  • An icon is a sign that denotes its objects by virtue of a quality that it shares with its objects.
  • An index is a sign that denotes its objects by virtue of an existential connection that it has with its objects.
  • A symbol is a sign that denotes its objects solely by virtue of the fact that it is interpreted to do so.

One of Peirce's early delineations of the three types of signs is still quite useful as a first approach to understanding their differences and their relationships to each other:

In the first place there are likenesses or copies — such as statues, pictures, emblems, hieroglyphics, and the like. Such representations stand for their objects only so far as they have an actual resemblance to them — that is agree with them in some characters. The peculiarity of such representations is that they do not determine their objects — they stand for anything more or less; for they stand for whatever they resemble and they resemble everything more or less.

The second kind of representations are such as are set up by a convention of men or a decree of God. Such are tallies, proper names, &c. The peculiarity of these conventional signs is that they represent no character of their objects. Likenesses denote nothing in particular; conventional signs connote nothing in particular.

The third and last kind of representations are symbols or general representations. They connote attributes and so connote them as to determine what they denote. To this class belong all words and all conceptions. Most combinations of words are also symbols. A proposition, an argument, even a whole book may be, and should be, a single symbol. (Peirce 1866, “Lowell Lecture 7”, CE 1, 467–468).

References

  • Peirce, C.S., Writings of Charles S. Peirce : A Chronological Edition, Volume 1, 1857–1866, Peirce Edition Project (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN, 1982. Cited as CE 1.
  • Peirce, C.S. (1865), "On the Logic of Science", Harvard University Lectures, CE 1, 161–302.
  • Peirce, C.S. (1866), "The Logic of Science, or, Induction and Hypothesis", Lowell Institute Lectures, CE 1, 357–504.

Readings

  • Awbrey, J.L., and Awbrey, S.M. (1995), “Interpretation as Action : The Risk of Inquiry”, Inquiry : Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 15(1), pp. 40–52. Archive. Online.

Resources

Syllabus

Focal nodes

Peer nodes

Logical operators

Template:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-end

Related topics

Template:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-end

Relational concepts

Template:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-end

Information, Inquiry

Template:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-end

Related articles

Template:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-breakTemplate:Col-end

Document history

Portions of the above article were adapted from the following sources under the GNU Free Documentation License, under other applicable licenses, or by permission of the copyright holders.

Retrieved from "https://mywikibiz.com/index.php?title=Semeiotic&oldid=466818"