Charles Sanders Peirce: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
en>Sun Creator
→‎Reception: {{Not a typo|Commens}}, I think I understand this word now, http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/
 
Line 1: Line 1:
Msvcr71.dll is an important file which assists help Windows procedure different components of the system including important files. Specifically, the file is employed to aid run corresponding files in the "Virtual C Runtime Library". These files are important inside accessing any settings which help the different applications plus programs in the program. The msvcr71.dll file fulfills many significant functions; though it's not spared from getting damaged or corrupted. Once the file gets corrupted or damaged, the computer can have a hard time processing plus reading components of the program. However, consumers want not panic considering this issue could be solved by following many procedures. And I might show we certain strategies about Msvcr71.dll.<br><br>So 1 day my computer suddenly started being strange. I was thus frustrated, because my files were missing, plus I cannot open the files which I needed, plus then, suddenly, everything stopped functioning!<br><br>Perfect Optimizer also offers to remove junk files plus is fully Windows Vista compatible. Many registry product merely don't have the time and funds to research Windows Vista errors. Because perfect optimizer has a large customer base, they do have the time, cash and factors to support totally help Windows Vista.<br><br>The computer was fairly quickly when we first purchased it. Because a registry was especially clean and free of mistakes. After time, a computer begins to run slow and freezes up today plus then. Because there are errors accumulating in it plus certain info is rewritten or even completely deleted by your incorrect uninstall of programs, improper operations, malware or additional elements. That is the reason why a computer performance decreases slowly plus become very unstable.<br><br>There are actually several [http://bestregistrycleanerfix.com/registry-reviver registry reviver] software pieces in the web and truly the only thing which we should do is to download them. Unfortunately, you cannot anticipate that all of these are as efficient because they claim to be. And as a result of this, it happens to be required for you to check if your vendor is truly reliable and credible.<br><br>If you think that there are issues with the d3d9.dll file, then you need to replace it with a brand-new working file. This is completed by conducting a series of steps and we can begin by getting "d3d9.zip" within the host. Then you must unzip the "d3d9.dll" file on the difficult drive of the computer. Proceed by finding "C:\Windows\System32" plus then finding the existing "d3d9.dll" on the PC. Once found, rename the file "d3d9.dll to d3d9BACKUP.dll" and then copy-paste this modern file to "C:\Windows\System32". After which, press "Start" followed by "Run" or look "Run" on Windows Vista & 7. As shortly because a box shows up, sort "cmd". A black screen may then appear plus you need to kind "regsvr32d3d9.dll" plus then click "Enter". This task may enable you to substitute the old file with all the fresh copy.<br><br>Reboot PC - Simply reboot your PC to find when the error is gone. Frequently, rebooting the PC readjusts the internal settings plus software and therefore fixes the problem. If it doesn't then move on to follow the instructions below.<br><br>There are many companies that offer the service of troubleshooting a PC every time we call them, all you must do is signal up with them plus for a little fee, you have your machine usually working effectively plus serve we better.
{{pp-move-indef}}
{{infobox
| title  = Charles Sanders Peirce
| image  = [[File:Charles Sanders Peirce.jpg|frameless]]
| caption = Charles Sanders Peirce
| label1  = Born
| data1  = September 10, 1839 in [[Cambridge, Massachusetts]]
| label2  = Died
| data2  = April 19, 1914 (aged 74) in [[Milford, Pennsylvania]]
| label3  = Nationality
| data3  = American
| label4  = Fields
| data4  = [[Logic]], [[Mathematics]],<br />[[Statistics]],<ref name=Hacking>[[Ian Hacking|Hacking, Ian]] (1990), "A Universe of Chance", ''The Taming of Chance'', pp. 200–215, Cambridge U. Pr.</ref><ref name=Stigler78>[[Stephen Stigler|Stigler, Stephen M.]] (1978), "[http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1176344123 Mathematical statistics in the early States]", ''Annals of Statistics'', v. 6, March, pp. 239–265, see p. 248. {{doi|10.1214/aos/1176344123}} {{jstor|2958876}} {{MR|483118}}.</ref> [[Philosophy]],<br> [[Metrology]],<ref name=metr>Crease, Robert P. (2009), "Charles Sanders Peirce and the first absolute measurement standard: In his brilliant but troubled life, Peirce was a pioneer in both metrology and philosophy", ''Physics Today'' v. 62, issue 12, December, pp. 39–44. [http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_62/iss_12/39_1.shtml?bypassSSO Eprint].</ref> [[Chemistry]],<br />[[Experimental psychology]]<ref name=psych>{{cite journal|doi=10.1002/1520-6696(197407)10:3<291::AID-JHBS2300100304>3.0.CO;2-N|title=Charles S. Peirce (1839-1914): The first American experimental psychologist|year=1974|last1=Cadwallader|first1=Thomas C.|journal=Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences|volume=10|issue=3|pages=291}}</ref><br>[[Economics]],<ref name=econom>Wible, James R. (2008), "[http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/rodopi/cpm/2008/00000005/00000002/art00003 The Economic Mind of Charles Sanders Peirce]", ''Contemporary Pragmatism'', v. 5, n. 2, December, pp. 39-67</ref> [[Linguistics]],<ref name=ling><span lang=de>Nöth, Winfried</span> (2000), "[http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/ling.htm Charles Sanders Peirce, Pathfinder in Linguistics]", ''[http://www.digitalpeirce.fee.unicamp.br/ Digital Encyclopedia of Charles S. Peirce]''.</ref><br />[[History of science]]
| label5  = Religious stance
| data5  = [[Episcopal Church (United States)|Episcopal]] but unconventional<ref>{{cite book|title=Charles Sanders Peirce: A Life|year=1998|publisher=Indiana University Press|isbn=9780253211613|author=Joseph Brent|edition=2|accessdate=2012-09-24|page=18|quote=Peirce had strong, though unorthodox, religious convictions. Although he was a communicant in the Episcopal church for most of his life, he expressed contempt for the theologies, metaphysics, and practices of established religions.}}</ref>
}}
{{C. S. Peirce articles}}
 
'''Charles Sanders Peirce''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|p|ɜr|s}},<ref>"Peirce", in the case of C.S. Peirce, always rhymes with the English-language word "terse" and so, in most dialects, is pronounced exactly like the English-language word "{{audio|en-us-purse.ogg|purse}}". See "[http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/news/1_3/13_4x.htm#pronunciation Note on the Pronunciation of 'Peirce']", ''Peirce Project Newsletter'', v. 1, nos. 3/4, Dec. 1994.</ref> like "purse",
September 10, 1839 – April 19, 1914) was an [[American philosopher]], [[logic]]ian, [[mathematics|mathematician]], and [[science|scientist]], sometimes known as "the father of [[pragmatism]]". He was educated as a chemist and employed as a scientist for 30 years. Today he is appreciated largely for his contributions to logic, mathematics, philosophy, scientific methodology, and [[semiotics]], and for his founding of [[pragmatism]].
 
In 1934, the philosopher [[Paul Weiss (philosopher)|Paul Weiss]] called Peirce "the most original and versatile of American philosophers and America's greatest logician".<ref>[[Paul Weiss (philosopher)|Weiss, Paul]] (1934), "Peirce, Charles Sanders" in the ''Dictionary of American Biography''. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/weissbio.htm Eprint].</ref>  ''Webster's Biographical Dictionary'' said in 1943 that Peirce was "now regarded as the most original thinker and greatest logician of his time."<ref>"Peirce, Benjamin", subheading "Charles Sanders", in ''Webster's Biographical Dictionary'' (1943/1960), Springfield, MA:  Merriam-Webster.</ref>
 
An innovator in mathematics, [[statistics]], philosophy, research methodology, and various sciences, Peirce considered himself,  first and foremost, a [[logic]]ian. He made major contributions to logic, but logic for him encompassed much of that which is now called [[epistemology]] and [[philosophy of science]]. He saw logic as the formal branch of [[semiotics]], of which he is a founder. As early as 1886 he saw that [[logic gate|logical operations could be carried out by electrical switching circuits]]; the same idea was used decades later to produce digital computers.<ref name=P2M>Peirce, C. S., "Letter, Peirce to [[Allan Marquand|A. Marquand]]", dated 1886, W 5:541–3, Google [http://books.google.com/books?id=DnvLHp919_wC&q=Marquand Preview]. See [[Arthur W. Burks|Burks, Arthur W.]], "Review: Charles S. Peirce, ''The new elements of mathematics''", ''Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society'' v. 84, n. 5 (1978), pp. 913–18, see 917. [http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS/Repository/1.0/Disseminate?view=body&id=pdf_1&handle=euclid.bams/1183541145 PDF Eprint]. Also p. xliv in Houser, Nathan, Introduction, W 5.</ref>
{{TOC limit|3}}
 
==Life==
[[File:Charles Sanders Peirce's birthplace building.jpg|thumb|left|275px|Peirce's birthplace. Now [[Lesley University]]'s Graduate School of Arts and Social Sciences]]
 
Peirce was born at 3 Phillips Place in [[Cambridge, Massachusetts]]. He was the son of Sarah Hunt Mills and [[Benjamin Peirce]], himself a professor of [[astronomy]] and [[mathematics]] at [[Harvard University]] and perhaps the first serious research mathematician in America. At age 12, Charles read his older brother's copy of [[Richard Whately]]'s ''Elements of Logic'', then the leading English-language text on the subject. So began his lifelong fascination with logic and reasoning.<ref>Fisch, Max, "[http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v1/v1intro.htm Introduction]", W 1:xvii, find phrase "One episode".</ref> He went on to earn the [[Bachelor of Arts|B.A.]] and [[Master of Arts (postgraduate)|M.A.]] from Harvard; in 1863 the [[Lawrence Scientific School]] awarded him a B.Sc. that was Harvard's first ''<span lang=la>summa cum laude</span>'' [[chemistry]] degree;<ref>"Peirce, Charles Sanders" (1898), ''The National Cyclopedia of American Biography'', v. 8, [http://books.google.com/books?id=1uI-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA409&dq=%22Peirce%2C%20Charles%22 p. 409].</ref> and otherwise his academic record was undistinguished.<ref>B:54–6</ref> At Harvard, he began lifelong friendships with [[Francis Ellingwood Abbot]], [[Chauncey Wright]], and [[William James]].<ref>B:363–4</ref> One of his Harvard instructors, [[Charles William Eliot]], formed an unfavorable opinion of Peirce. This opinion proved fateful, because Eliot, while President of Harvard 1869–1909—a period encompassing nearly all of Peirce's working life—repeatedly vetoed Harvard's employing Peirce in any capacity.<ref>B:19-20, 53, 75, 245</ref>
 
Peirce suffered from his late teens onward from a nervous condition then known as "facial neuralgia", which would today be diagnosed as [[trigeminal neuralgia]]. Brent says that when in the throes of its pain "he was, at first, almost stupefied, and then aloof, cold, depressed, extremely suspicious, impatient of the slightest crossing, and subject to violent outbursts of temper".<ref>B:40</ref> Its consequences may have led to the social isolation which made his life's later years so tragic.
 
===Early employment===
Between 1859 and 1891, Peirce was intermittently employed in various scientific capacities by the [[U.S. National Geodetic Survey|United States Coast Survey]],<ref name=Burch>Burch, Robert (2001, 2010), "[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/peirce/ Charles Sanders Peirce]", ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''.</ref> where he enjoyed his highly influential father's protection<ref>B:139</ref> until the latter's death in 1880. That employment exempted Peirce from having to take part in the [[American Civil War|Civil War]]; it would have been very awkward for him to do so, as the [[Boston Brahmin]] Peirces sympathized with the [[Confederate States of America|Confederacy]].<ref>B:61-2</ref> At the Survey, he worked mainly in [[geodesy]] and [[gravimetry]], refining the use of [[pendulum]]s to determine small local variations in the [[Earth]]'s [[gravity]].<ref name=Burch/>  He was elected a resident fellow of the [[American Academy of Arts and Sciences]] in January 1867.<ref>B:69</ref> The Survey sent him to Europe five times,<ref>B:368</ref> first in 1871 as part of a group sent to observe a [[solar eclipse]]; there, he sought out [[Augustus De Morgan]], [[William Stanley Jevons]], and [[William Kingdon Clifford]],<ref>B:79-81</ref> British mathematicians and logicians whose turn of mind resembled his own. From 1869 to 1872, he was employed as an Assistant in Harvard's astronomical observatory, doing important work on determining the brightness of [[star]]s and the shape of the [[Milky Way]].<ref name=SP2>Moore, Edward C., and Robin, Richard S., eds., (1964), ''Studies in the Philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce, Second Series'', Amherst: U. of Massachusetts Press. On Peirce the astronomer, see Lenzen's chapter.</ref> On April 20, 1877 he was elected a member of the [[United States National Academy of Sciences|National Academy of Sciences]].<ref>B:367</ref> Also in 1877, he proposed measuring the [[meter]] as so many [[wavelength]]s of [[light]] of a certain [[frequency]],<ref>Fisch, Max (1983), "Peirce as Scientist, Mathematician, Historian, Logician, and Philosopher", ''[[#SIL|Studies in Logic]]'' (new edition), see p. x.</ref> the kind of definition employed [[Metre#Standard wavelength of krypton-86 emission|from 1860 to 1883]].
 
During the 1880s, Peirce's indifference to bureaucratic detail waxed while his Survey work's quality and timeliness waned. Peirce took years to write reports that he should have completed in months.{{according to whom|date=March 2013}} Meanwhile, he wrote entries, ultimately thousands during 1883–1909, on philosophy, logic, science, and other subjects for the encyclopedic ''[[Century Dictionary]]''.<ref>See "[http://www.pep.uqam.ca/short.pep Peirce Edition Project (UQÀM) - in short]" from [[#PEP|PEP-UQÀM]].</ref> In 1885, an investigation by the [[William B. Allison|Allison]] Commission exonerated Peirce, but led to the dismissal of Superintendent [[Julius Hilgard]] and several other Coast Survey employees for misuse of public funds.<ref>Houser, Nathan, "[http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v5/v5intro.htm Introduction]", W 5:xxviii-xxix, find "Allison".</ref> In 1891, Peirce resigned from the Coast Survey at Superintendent [[Thomas Corwin Mendenhall]]'s request.<ref>B:202</ref> He never again held regular employment.
 
===Johns Hopkins University===
In 1879, Peirce was appointed Lecturer in logic at the new [[Johns Hopkins University]], which had strong departments in a number of areas that interested him, such as philosophy ([[Josiah Royce|Royce]] and [[John Dewey|Dewey]] completed their PhDs at Hopkins), psychology (taught by [[G. Stanley Hall]] and studied by [[Joseph Jastrow]], who coauthored a landmark empirical study with Peirce), and mathematics (taught by [[J. J. Sylvester]], who came to admire Peirce's work on mathematics and logic). <span id=GS>1883</span> saw publication of his <span id=SIL>''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#SIL|Studies in Logic by Members of the Johns Hopkins University]]''</span> containing works by himself and [[Allan Marquand]], [[Christine Ladd-Franklin|Christine Ladd]], [[Benjamin Ives Gilman]], and [[Oscar Howard Mitchell]], several of whom were his graduate students.<ref name=grads>Houser, Nathan (1989), "[http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v4/v4intro.htm Introduction]", W 4:xxxviii, find "Eighty-nine".</ref> Peirce's nontenured position at Hopkins was the only academic appointment he ever held.
 
Brent documents something Peirce never suspected, namely that his efforts to obtain academic employment, grants, and scientific respectability were repeatedly frustrated by the covert opposition of a major Canadian-American scientist of the day, [[Simon Newcomb]].<ref>B:150–4, 195, 279–80, 289</ref> Peirce's efforts may also have been hampered by a difficult personality; Brent conjectures as to further psychological difficulty.<ref>B:xv</ref>
 
Peirce's personal life worked against his professional success. After his first wife, [[Melusina Fay Peirce|Harriet Melusina Fay]] ("Zina"), left him in 1875,<ref>B:98–101</ref> Peirce, while still legally married, became involved with [[Juliette Peirce|Juliette]], whose name, given variously as Froissy and Pourtalai<ref>B:141</ref> and nationality (she spoke French<ref>B:148</ref>) remain uncertain.<ref>Houser, Nathan, "[http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v6/v6intro.htm Introduction]", W 6, first paragraph.</ref> When his divorce from Zina became final in 1883, he married Juliette.<ref>B:123, 368</ref> That year, Newcomb pointed out to a Johns Hopkins trustee that Peirce, while a Hopkins employee, had lived and traveled with a woman to whom he was not married; the ensuing scandal led to his dismissal in January 1884.<ref>B:150–1, 368</ref> Over the years Peirce sought academic employment at various universities without success.<ref>In 1885 (B:369); in 1890 and 1900 (B:215, 273); in 1891 (B:215–16); and in 1892 (B:151–2, 222).</ref> He had no children by either marriage.<ref>B:77</ref>
 
[[File:Milford and NYC and Cambridge.GIF|frame|Cambridge, where Peirce was born and raised, New York City, where he often visited and sometimes lived, and Milford, where he spent the later years of his life with his second wife Juliette.]] [[File:JulietteAndCharles.JPG|thumb|275px|Juliette and Charles by a well at their home Arisbe in 1907]]
 
===Poverty===
In 1887 Peirce spent part of his inheritance from his parents to buy {{convert|2000|acre|km2|0}} of rural land near [[Milford, Pennsylvania]], which never yielded an economic return.<ref>B:191-2, 217, 270, 318, 321, 337.</ref> There he had an 1854 farmhouse remodeled to his design.<ref>B:13</ref> The Peirces named the property "[[Juliette Peirce#Arisbe|Arisbe]]". There they lived with few interruptions for the rest of their lives,<ref>B:369–74</ref> Charles writing prolifically, much of it unpublished to this day (see [[#Works|Works]]). Living beyond their means soon led to grave financial and legal difficulties.<ref>B:191</ref> He spent much of his last two decades unable to afford heat in winter and subsisting on old bread donated by the local baker. Unable to afford new stationery, he wrote on the [[verso]] side of old manuscripts. An outstanding warrant for assault and unpaid debts led to his being a fugitive in New York City for a while.<ref>B:246</ref> Several people, including his brother [[James Mills Peirce]]<ref>B:242</ref> and his neighbors, relatives of [[Gifford Pinchot]], settled his debts and paid his property taxes and mortgage.<ref>B:271</ref>
 
Peirce did some scientific and engineering consulting and wrote much for meager pay, mainly encyclopedic dictionary entries, and reviews for ''[[The Nation (U.S. periodical)|The Nation]]'' (with whose editor, [[Wendell Phillips Garrison]], he became friendly). He did translations for the [[Smithsonian Institution]], at its director [[Samuel Langley]]'s instigation. Peirce also did substantial mathematical calculations for Langley's research on powered flight. Hoping to make money, Peirce tried inventing.<ref>B:249–55</ref> He began but did not complete a number of books.<ref>B:371</ref> In 1888, President [[Grover Cleveland]] appointed him to the [[Assay Commission]].<ref>B:189</ref>
 
[[File:Charles S. Peirce House near Milford PA.jpg|thumb|left|325px|Arisbe in 2011]]
 
From 1890 on, he had a friend and admirer in Judge [[Francis C. Russell]] of Chicago,<ref>B:370</ref> who introduced Peirce to editor [[Paul Carus]] and owner [[Edward C. Hegeler]] of the pioneering American philosophy journal ''[[The Monist]]'', which eventually published at least 14 articles by Peirce.<ref>B:205–6</ref> He wrote many texts in [[James Mark Baldwin]]'s ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#Peirce's definitions in the Baldwin|Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology]]'' (1901–5); half of those credited to him appear to have been written actually by [[Christine Ladd-Franklin]] under his supervision.<ref>B:374–6</ref> He applied in 1902 to the newly formed [[Carnegie Institution]] for a grant to write a systematic book of his life's work. The application was doomed; his nemesis Newcomb served on the Institution's executive committee, and its President had been the President of Johns Hopkins at the time of Peirce's dismissal.<ref>B:279–89</ref>
 
The one who did the most to help Peirce in these desperate times was his old friend [[William James]], dedicating his ''Will to Believe'' (1897) to Peirce, and arranging for Peirce to be paid to give two series of lectures at or near Harvard (1898 and 1903).<ref>B:261–4, 290–2, 324</ref> Most important, each year from 1907 until James's death in 1910, James wrote to his friends in the Boston intelligentsia to request financial aid for Peirce; the fund continued even after James died. Peirce reciprocated by designating James's eldest son as his heir should Juliette predecease him.<ref>B:306–7 & 315–6</ref> It has been believed that this was also why Peirce used "Santiago" ("St. James" in English) as a middle name, but he appeared in print as early as 1890 as Charles Santiago Peirce. (See [[Charles Santiago Sanders Peirce]] for discussion and references).
 
Peirce died destitute in [[Milford, Pennsylvania]], twenty years before his widow.
 
==Reception==
[[Bertrand Russell]] (1959) wrote,<ref>Russell, Bertrand (1959), ''Wisdom of the West'', p. 276.</ref> "Beyond doubt [...] he was one of the most original minds of the later nineteenth century, and certainly the greatest American thinker ever." (Russell and [[Alfred North Whitehead|Whitehead]]'s ''[[Principia Mathematica]]'', published from 1910 to 1913, does not mention Peirce; Peirce's work was not widely known till later.)<ref name=Anellis>Anellis, Irving H. (1995), "Peirce Rustled, Russell Pierced: How Charles Peirce and Bertrand Russell Viewed Each Other's Work in Logic, and an Assessment of Russell's Accuracy and Role in the Historiography of Logic", ''Modern Logic'' 5, 270–328. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/anellis/csp&br.htm Eprint].</ref> [[A. N. Whitehead]], while reading some of Peirce's unpublished manuscripts soon after arriving at Harvard in 1924, was struck by how Peirce had anticipated his own "process" thinking. (On Peirce and [[process metaphysics]], see Lowe 1964.<ref name=SP2/>) [[Karl Popper]] viewed Peirce as "one of the greatest philosophers of all times".<ref>Popper, Karl (1972), ''Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach'', p. 212.</ref> Yet Peirce's achievements were not immediately recognized. His imposing contemporaries [[William James]] and [[Josiah Royce]]<ref>See Royce, Josiah, and Kernan, W. Fergus (1916), "Charles Sanders Peirce", ''The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Method'' v. 13, pp. 701–9. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/royce/cspobit.htm Eprint].</ref> admired him, and [[Cassius Jackson Keyser]] at Columbia and [[C. K. Ogden]] wrote about Peirce with respect, but to no immediate effect.
 
The first scholar to give Peirce his considered professional attention was Royce's student [[Morris Raphael Cohen]], the editor of an anthology of Peirce's writings titled ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#CLL|Chance, Love, and Logic]]'' (1923) and the author of the first bibliography of Peirce's scattered writings.<ref>Ketner ''et al.'' (1986), ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#cb|Comprehensive Bibliography]]'', see p. iii.</ref> [[John Dewey]] studied under Peirce at Johns Hopkins<ref name=grads/> and, from 1916 onwards, Dewey's writings repeatedly mention Peirce with deference. His 1938 ''Logic: The Theory of Inquiry'' is much influenced by Peirce.<ref>Hookway, Christopher (2008), "[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism/ Pragmatism]", ''Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy''.</ref> The publication of the first six volumes of the ''Collected Papers'' (1931–35), the most important event to date in Peirce studies and one that Cohen made possible by raising the needed funds,<ref>B:8</ref> did not prompt an outpouring of secondary studies. The editors of those volumes, [[Charles Hartshorne]] and [[Paul Weiss (philosopher)|Paul Weiss]], did not become Peirce specialists. Early landmarks of the secondary literature include the monographs by Buchler (1939), Feibleman (1946), and [[T. A. Goudge|Goudge]] (1950), the 1941 Ph.D. thesis by [[Arthur W. Burks]] (who went on to edit volumes 7 and 8), and the studies edited by Wiener and Young (1952). The [[#CSPS|Charles S. Peirce Society]] was founded in 1946. Its ''Transactions'', an academic quarterly specializing in Peirce, pragmatism, and American philosophy, has appeared since 1965.
 
In 1949, while doing unrelated archival work, the historian of mathematics [[Carolyn Eisele]] (1902–2000) chanced on an autograph letter by Peirce. So began her 40 years of research on Peirce the mathematician and scientist, culminating in Eisele (1976, 1979, 1985). Beginning around 1960, the philosopher and [[history of ideas|historian of ideas]] [[Max Fisch]] (1900–1995) emerged as an authority on Peirce; Fisch (1986)<ref name=Fisch>Fisch, Max (1986), ''Peirce, Semeiotic, and Pragmatism'', Kenneth Laine Ketner and Christian J. W. Kloesel, eds., Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana U. Pr.</ref> includes many of his relevant articles, including a wide-ranging survey (Fisch 1986: 422–48) of the impact of Peirce's thought through 1983.
 
Peirce has gained a significant international following, marked by university research centers devoted to Peirce studies and [[pragmatism]] in Brazil ([[#CIEP|CeneP/CIEP]]), Finland ([[#CDPT|HPRC, including {{Not a typo|Commens}}]]), Germany ([[#IRGAI|Wirth's group]], [[#RGSEME|Hoffman's and Otte's group]], and Deuser's and Härle's group<ref>Theological Research Group in C.S. Peirce's Philosophy (<span lang=de>Hermann Deuser, Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen; Wilfred Härle, Philipps-Universität Marburg</span>, Germany).</ref>), France ([[#LIRSCE|L'I.R.S.C.E.]]), Spain ([[#GEP|GEP]]), and Italy ([[#CSPI|CSP]]). His writings have been translated into several languages, including German, French, Finnish, Spanish, and Swedish. Since 1950, there have been French, Italian, Spanish, British, and Brazilian Peirceans of note. For many years, the North American philosophy department most devoted to Peirce was the [[University of Toronto]]'s, thanks in good part to the leadership of [[T. A. Goudge|Thomas Goudge]] and David Savan. In recent years, U.S. Peirce scholars have clustered at [[IUPUI|Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis]], home of the [[#PEP|Peirce Edition Project]] (PEP), and the [[Pennsylvania State University]].
 
{{quote|Currently, considerable interest is being taken in Peirce's ideas by researchers wholly outside the arena of academic philosophy. The interest comes from industry, business, technology, intelligence organizations, and the military; and it has resulted in the existence of a substantial number of agencies, institutes, businesses, and laboratories in which ongoing research into and development of Peircean concepts are being vigorously undertaken.|Robert Burch, 2001, updated 2010<ref name=Burch/>}}
 
==Works==
Peirce's reputation rests largely on a number of academic papers published in American scientific and scholarly journals such as ''Proceedings of the [[American Academy of Arts and Sciences]]'', the ''Journal of Speculative Philosophy'', ''[[The Monist]]'', ''[[Popular Science]] Monthly'', the ''[[American Journal of Mathematics]]'', ''Memoirs of the [[United States National Academy of Sciences|National Academy of Sciences]]'', ''[[The Nation (U.S. periodical)|The Nation]]'', and others. See [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#Articles by Peirce, published in his lifetime|Articles by Peirce, published in his lifetime]] for an extensive list with links to them online. The only full-length book (neither extract nor pamphlet) that Peirce authored and saw published in his lifetime<ref>[[Arthur Burks|Burks, Arthur]], Introduction, CP 7, p. xi.</ref> was ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#PR|Photometric Researches]]'' (1878), a 181-page monograph on the applications of spectrographic methods to astronomy. While at Johns Hopkins, he edited ''[[#SIL|Studies in Logic]]'' (1883), containing chapters by himself and his [[#GS|graduate students]]. Besides lectures during his years (1879–1884) as Lecturer in Logic at Johns Hopkins, he gave at least nine series of lectures, many now published; see [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#Lectures by Peirce|Lectures by Peirce]].
 
[[Harvard University]] obtained from Peirce's widow soon after his death the papers found in his study, but did not microfilm them until 1964. Only after Richard Robin (1967)<ref>Robin, Richard S. (1967), ''[http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/robin/robin.htm Annotated Catalogue of the Papers of Charles S. Peirce]''. Amherst MA: [[University of Massachusetts Press]].</ref> catalogued this ''[[Nachlass]]'' did it become clear that Peirce had left approximately 1650 unpublished manuscripts, totaling over 100,000 pages,<ref>"The manuscript material now (1997) comes to more than a hundred thousand pages. These contain many pages of no philosophical interest, but the number of pages on philosophy certainly number much more than half of that. Also, a significant but unknown number of manuscripts have been lost." — Joseph Ransdell (1997), "Some Leading Ideas of Peirce's Semiotic", [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/ransdell/leading.htm#note2 end note 2], 1997 light revision of 1977 version in ''Semiotica'' 19:157–78.</ref> mostly still unpublished except [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#mf|on microfilm]]. On the vicissitudes of Peirce's papers, see Houser (1989).<ref>Houser, Nathan, "The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Peirce Papers", Fourth Congress of the [[IASS]], Perpignan, France, 1989. ''Signs of Humanity'', v. 3, 1992, pp. 1259–68. [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/houser/fortunes.htm Eprint]</ref> Reportedly the papers remain in unsatisfactory condition.<ref>Memorandum to the President of Charles S. Peirce Society by Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen, U. of Helsinki, March 29, 2012. [http://www.helsinki.fi/~pietarin/Memorandum-Peirce%20Society-Pietarinen-2012.pdf Eprint].</ref>
 
The first published anthology of Peirce's articles was the one-volume ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#CLL|Chance, Love and Logic: Philosophical Essays]]'', edited by [[Morris Raphael Cohen]], 1923, still in print. [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#Other collections|Other one-volume anthologies]] were published in 1940, 1957, 1958, 1972, 1994, and 2009, most still in print. The main posthumous editions<ref>See for example "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/collections.html Collections of Peirce's Writings]" at ''Commens'', U. of Helsinki.</ref> of Peirce's works in their long trek to light, often multi-volume, and some still in print, have included:
 
<span id=CP></span>1931–58: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#CP|Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce]]'' (CP), 8 volumes, includes many published works, along with a selection of previously unpublished work and a smattering of his correspondence. This long-time standard edition drawn from Peirce's work from the 1860s to 1913 remains the most comprehensive survey of his prolific output from 1893 to 1913. It is organized thematically, but texts (including lecture series) are often split up across volumes, while texts from various stages in Peirce's development are often combined, requiring frequent visits to editors' notes.<ref>See 1987 review by B. Kuklick (of ''Peirce'' by Christopher Hookway), in ''British Journal for the Philosophy of Science''v. 38, n. 1, pp. 117-19. [http://bjps.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/38/1/117 First page].</ref> Edited (1–6) by [[Charles Hartshorne]] and [[Paul Weiss (philosopher)|Paul Weiss]] and (7–8) by [[Arthur Burks]], in print and online.
 
1975–87: [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#CN|''Charles Sanders Peirce: Contributions to'' The Nation]], 4 volumes, includes Peirce's more than 300 reviews and articles published 1869–1908 in ''[[The Nation]]''. Edited by Kenneth Laine Ketner and James Edward Cook, online.
 
<span id=NEM></span>1976: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#NEM|The New Elements of Mathematics by Charles S. Peirce]]'', 4 volumes in 5, included many previously unpublished Peirce manuscripts on mathematical subjects, along with Peirce's important published mathematical articles. Edited by Carolyn Eisele, out of print.
 
<span id=SS></span>1977: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#SS|Semiotic and Significs: The Correspondence between C. S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby]]'' (2nd edition 2001), included Peirce's entire correspondence (1903–1912) with [[Victoria, Lady Welby]]. Peirce's other published correspondence is largely limited to the 14 letters included in volume 8 of the ''Collected Papers'', and the 20-odd pre-1890 items included so far in the ''Writings''. Edited by Charles S. Hardwick with James Cook, out of print.
 
<span id=W></span>1982–now: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#W|Writings of Charles S. Peirce, A Chronological Edition]]'' (W), Volumes 1–6 & 8, of a projected 30. The limited coverage, and defective editing and organization, of the ''Collected Papers'' led Max Fisch and others in the 1970s to found the Peirce Edition Project (PEP), whose mission is to prepare a more complete critical chronological edition. Only seven volumes have appeared to date, but they cover the period from 1859–1892, when Peirce carried out much of his best-known work. W 8 was published in November 2010; and work continues on W 7, 9, and 11. In print and online.
 
1985: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#HP|Historical Perspectives on Peirce's Logic of Science: A History of Science]]'', 2 volumes. Auspitz has said,<ref>Auspitz, Josiah Lee (1994), "The Wasp Leaves the Bottle: Charles Sanders Peirce", ''The American Scholar'', v. 63, n. 4, autumn, 602–18. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/auspitz/escape.htm Eprint].</ref> "The extent of Peirce's immersion in the science of his day is evident in his reviews in the ''Nation'' [...] and in his papers, grant applications, and publishers' prospectuses in the history and practice of science", referring latterly to ''Historical Perspectives''. Edited by Carolyn Eisele, out of print.
 
<span id=RLT></span>1992: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#RLT|Reasoning and the Logic of Things]]'' collects in one place Peirce's 1898 series of lectures invited by William James. Edited by Kenneth Laine Ketner, with commentary by [[Hilary Putnam]], in print.
 
<span id=EP></span>1992–98: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#EP|The Essential Peirce]]'' (EP), 2 volumes, is an important recent sampler of Peirce's philosophical writings. Edited (1) by Nathan Hauser and Christian Kloesel and (2) by PEP editors, in print.
 
1997: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#PPM|Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking]]'' collects Peirce's 1903 Harvard "Lectures on Pragmatism" in a study edition, including drafts, of Peirce's lecture manuscripts, which had been previously published in abridged form; the lectures now also appear in EP 2. Edited by Patricia Ann Turisi, in print.
 
2010: ''[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#PMSW|Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Writings]]'' collects important writings by Peirce on the subject, many not previously in print. Edited by Matthew E. Moore, in print.
 
==Mathematics==
[[File:Peirce-quincuncial-bright-lines.gif|thumb|The [[Peirce quincuncial projection]] of a sphere [[conformal map|keeps angles true]] except at several isolated points and results in less distortion of area than in other projections.]]Peirce's most important work in pure mathematics was in logical and foundational areas. He also worked on [[linear algebra]], [[Matrix (mathematics)|matrices]], various geometries, [[topology]] and [[Listing number]]s, [[Bell number]]s, [[Graph theory|graph]]s, the [[four-color problem]], and the nature of continuity.
 
He worked on applied mathematics in economics, engineering, and map projections (such as the [[Peirce quincuncial projection]]), and was especially active in [[probability]] and [[statistics]].<ref name=Burks>[[Arthur W. Burks|Burks, Arthur W.]], "Review: Charles S. Peirce, ''The new elements of mathematics''", ''Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society'' v. 84, n. 5 (1978), [http://projecteuclid.org/DPubS/Repository/1.0/Disseminate?view=body&id=pdf_1&handle=euclid.bams/1183541145 pp. 913–18 (PDF)].</ref>
 
;Discoveries
 
Peirce made a number of striking discoveries in formal logic and foundational mathematics, nearly all of which came to be appreciated only long after he died:
 
In 1860<ref>Peirce (1860 MS), "Orders of Infinity", [http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/PEP_news_Sept2010.pdf ''News from the Peirce Edition Project'', September 2010] (PDF), p. 6, with the manuscript's text. Also see logic historian Irving Anellis's [http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/6621/focus=6626 November 11, 2010 comment] at peirce-l.</ref> he suggested a cardinal arithmetic for infinite numbers, years before any work by [[Georg Cantor]] (who completed [[Georg Cantor#Teacher and researcher|his dissertation in 1867]]) and without access to [[Bernard Bolzano]]'s 1851 (posthumous) ''<span lang=de>Paradoxien des Unendlichen</span>''.
<div style="float:left;width:8.5em;text-align:center;margin-right:20px;border:solid 1px #bbb"><div style="margin:2px;background-color:#dddddd;font-size:40pt;height:50pt;line-height:100%">↓</div> <div style="font-size:8pt;line-height:150%">The [[Logical NOR|Peirce arrow]], <br>symbol for "(neither)...'''nor'''...", also called the Quine dagger.</div></div>
In 1880–81<ref>Peirce (MS, winter of 1880–81), "A Boolean Algebra with One Constant", CP 4.12–20, W 4:218-21. Google [http://books.google.com/books?id=E7ZUnx3FqrcC&q=378+Winter Preview]. See Roberts, Don D. (1973), ''The Existential Graphs of Charles S. Peirce'', p. 131.</ref> he showed how [[Boolean algebra (logic)|Boolean algebra]] could be done via a [[Functional completeness|repeated sufficient single binary operation]] ([[logical NOR]]), anticipating [[Henry M. Sheffer]] by 33 years. (See also [[De Morgan's Laws]]).
 
In 1881<ref>Peirce (1881), "On the Logic of Number", ''American Journal of Mathematics'' v. 4, pp. [http://books.google.com/books?id=LQgPAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA85 85]-95. Reprinted (CP 3.252–88), (W 4:299–309). See See Shields, Paul (1997), "Peirce's Axiomatization of Arithmetic", in Houser ''et al.'', eds., ''Studies in the Logic of Charles S. Peirce''.</ref> he set out the [[Peano axioms|axiomatization of natural number arithmetic]], a few years before [[Richard Dedekind]] and [[Giuseppe Peano]]. In the same paper Peirce gave, years before Dedekind, the first purely cardinal definition of a finite set in the sense now known as "[[Dedekind-finite]]", and implied by the same stroke an important formal definition of an [[infinite set]] (Dedekind-infinite), as a [[Set (mathematics)|set]] that can be put into a [[one-to-one correspondence]] with one of its proper [[subsets]].
 
In 1885<ref name=CSP1885>Peirce (1885), "On the Algebra of Logic: A Contribution to the Philosophy of Notation", ''American Journal of Mathematics'' 7, two parts, first part published 1885, pp. [http://books.google.com/books?id=lwYPAAAAIAAJ&&pg=PA180 180]–202 (see Houser in [http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v4/v4introx.htm#21note linked paragraph] in "Introduction" in W 4). Presented, National Academy of Sciences, Newport, RI, 14–17 October 1884 (see EP 1, [http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/ep/ep1/heads/ep1heads.htm#16 Headnote 16]). 1885 is the year usually given for this work. Reprinted CP 3.359–403, W 5:162–90, EP 1:225–8, in part.</ref> he distinguished between first-order and second-order quantification.<ref name=Putnam/><ref>It was in Peirce's 1885 "On the Algebra of Logic". See Byrnes, John (1998), "Peirce's First-Order Logic of 1885", ''Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society'' v. 34, n. 4, pp. 949-76.</ref> In the same paper he set out what can be read as the first (primitive) [[axiomatic set theory]], anticipating [[Zermelo]] by about two decades (Brady 2000,<ref name=Brady>Brady, Geraldine (2000), ''From Peirce to Skolem: A Neglected Chapter in the History of Logic'', North-Holland/Elsevier Science BV, Amsterdam, Netherlands.</ref> pp.&nbsp;132–3).
 
In 1886 he saw that Boolean calculations could be carried out via electrical switches,<ref name=P2M/> anticipating [[Claude Shannon]] by more than 50 years. [[File:PeirceAlphaGraphs.svg|thumb|300px|[[Existential graph]]s: Alpha graphs]]
By the later 1890s<ref>See Peirce (1898), Lecture 3, "The Logic of Relatives" (not the 1897 ''Monist'' article), ''[[#RLT|Reasoning and the Logic of Things]]'' , pp. 146–64, see 151.</ref> he was devising [[existential graph]]s, a diagrammatic notation for the [[predicate calculus]]. Based on them are [[John F. Sowa]]'s [[conceptual graph]]s and Sun-Joo Shin's [[diagrammatic reasoning]].
 
;''The New Elements of Mathematics''
 
Peirce wrote drafts for an introductory textbook, with the working title ''The New Elements of Mathematics'', that presented mathematics from an original standpoint. Those drafts and many other of his previously unpublished mathematical manuscripts finally appeared<ref name=Burks /> in ''The New Elements of Mathematics by Charles S. Peirce'' (1976), edited by mathematician Carolyn Eisele.
 
;Nature of mathematics
 
Peirce agreed with [[Auguste Comte]] in regarding mathematics as more basic than philosophy and the special sciences (of nature and mind). Peirce [[Classification of the sciences (Peirce)|classified]] mathematics into three subareas: (1) mathematics of logic, (2) discrete series, and (3) pseudo-continua (as he called them, including the [[real numbers]]) and continua. Influenced by his father [[Benjamin Peirce|Benjamin]], Peirce argued that mathematics studies purely hypothetical objects and is not just the science of quantity but is more broadly the science which draws necessary conclusions; that mathematics aids logic, not vice versa; and that logic itself is part of philosophy and is the science ''about'' drawing conclusions necessary and otherwise.<ref>Peirce (1898), "The Logic of Mathematics in Relation to Education" in ''Educational Review'' v. 15, pp. [http://www.archive.org/stream/educationalrevie15newyuoft#page/209/mode/1up 209–16] (via ''Internet Archive''). Reprinted CP 3.553–62. See also his "The Simplest Mathematics" (1902 MS), CP 4.227–323.</ref>
 
===Mathematics of logic===
<div class=infobox style="padding:5px;font-size:94%;width:auto">Mathematical logic and foundations, some noted articles
* On an Improvement in Boole's Calculus of Logic (1867)
* Description of a Notation for the Logic of Relatives (1870)
* On the Algebra of Logic (1880)
* A Boolean Algebra with One Constant (1880 MS)
* On the Logic of Number (1881)
* Note B: The Logic of Relatives (1883)
* On the Algebra of Logic: A Contribution to the <br>Philosophy of Notation (1884/1885)
* The Logic of Relatives (1897)
* The Simplest Mathematics (1902 MS)
* Prolegomena To an Apology For Pragmaticism (1906, <br>on existential graphs)
</div> Beginning with his first paper on the [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#LOR1870|"Logic of Relatives" (1870)]], Peirce extended the [[theory of relations]] that [[Augustus De Morgan]] had just recently awakened from its Cinderella slumbers. Much of the mathematics of relations now taken for granted was "borrowed" from Peirce, not always with all due credit; on that and on how the young [[Bertrand Russell]], especially his ''Principles of Mathematics'' and ''[[Principia Mathematica]]'', did not do Peirce justice, see Anellis (1995).<ref name=Anellis/> In 1918 the logician [[Clarence Irving Lewis|C.&nbsp;I. Lewis]] wrote, "The contributions of C.S. Peirce to symbolic logic are more numerous and varied than those of any other writer — at least in the nineteenth century."<ref>Lewis, Clarence Irving (1918), ''A Survey of Symbolic Logic'', see ch. 1, §7 "Peirce", pp. 79–106, see [http://www.archive.org/stream/surveyofsymbolic00lewiiala#page/79/mode/1up p. 79] (''Internet Archive''). Note that Lewis's bibliography lists works by Frege, tagged with asterisks as important.</ref> Beginning in 1940, [[Alfred Tarski]] and his students rediscovered aspects of Peirce's larger vision of relational logic, developing the perspective of [[relation algebra]].
 
Relational logic gained applications. In mathematics, it influenced the abstract analysis of [[E. H. Moore]] and the [[Lattice (order)|lattice theory]] of [[Garrett Birkhoff]]. In computer science, the [[relational model]] for [[database]]s was developed with Peircean ideas in work of [[Edgar F. Codd]], who was a doctoral student<ref>Avery, John (2003) ''Information theory and evolution'', p. 167; also Mitchell, Melanie, "[http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~mm/MMScientificAncestry.html My Scientific Ancestry]".</ref> of [[Arthur W. Burks]], a Peirce scholar. In economics, relational logic was used by [[Frank P. Ramsey]], [[John von Neumann]], and [[Paul Samuelson]] to study preferences and utility and by [[Kenneth J. Arrow]] in ''[[Social Choice and Individual Values]]'', following Arrow's association with Tarski at [[City College of New York]].
 
On Peirce and his contemporaries [[Ernst Schröder]] and [[Gottlob Frege]], [[Hilary Putnam]] (1982)<ref name=Putnam>Putnam, Hilary (1982), "Peirce the Logician", ''Historia Mathematica'' 9, 290–301. Reprinted, pp. 252–60 in Putnam (1990), ''Realism with a Human Face'', Harvard. [http://www.jfsowa.com/peirce/putnam.htm Excerpt with article's last five pages].</ref> documented that Frege's work on the logic of quantifiers had little influence on his contemporaries, although it was published four years before the work of Peirce and his student [[Oscar Howard Mitchell]]. Putnam found that mathematicians and logicians learned about the logic of quantifiers through the independent work of Peirce and Mitchell, particularly through Peirce's "On the Algebra of Logic: A Contribution to the Philosophy of Notation"<ref name=CSP1885/> (1885), published in the premier American mathematical journal of the day, and cited by [[Peano]] and Schröder, among others, who ignored Frege. They also adopted and modified Peirce's notations, typographical variants of those now used. Peirce apparently was ignorant of Frege's work, despite their overlapping achievements in logic, [[philosophy of language]], and the [[foundations of mathematics]].
 
Peirce's work on formal logic had admirers besides [[Ernst Schröder]]:
* Philosophical algebraist [[William Kingdon Clifford]]<ref>Beil, Ralph G. and Ketner, Kenneth (2003), "Peirce, Clifford, and Quantum Theory", ''International Journal of Theoretical Physics'' v. 42, n. 9, pp. 1957-1972.</ref> and logician [[William Ernest Johnson]], both British;
* The Polish school of logic and foundational mathematics, including [[Alfred Tarski]];
* [[Arthur Prior]], who praised and studied Peirce's logical work in a 1964 paper<ref name=SP2/> and in ''Formal Logic'' (saying on page 4 that Peirce "perhaps had a keener eye for essentials than any other logician before or since.").
 
A philosophy of logic, grounded in his categories and semiotic, can be extracted from Peirce's writings and, along with Peirce's logical work more generally, is exposited and defended in Hilary Putnam (1982);<ref name=Putnam /> the Introduction in Nathan Houser ''et al.'' (1997);<ref>Houser, Roberts, and Van Evra, eds. (1997), ''Studies in the Logic of Charles Sanders Peirce'', Indiana U., Bloomington, IN.</ref> and Randall Dipert's chapter in Cheryl Misak (2004).<ref>Misak, ed. (2004), ''The Cambridge Companion to Peirce'', Cambridge U., UK.</ref>
 
===Continua===
Continuity and [[synechism]] are central in Peirce's philosophy: "I did not at first suppose that it was, as I gradually came to find it, the master-Key of philosophy".<ref>Peirce (1893-1894, MS 949, p. 1)</ref>
 
From a mathematical point of view, he embraced [[infinitesimal]]s and worked long on the mathematics of continua. He long held that the real numbers constitute a pseudo-continuum;<ref>Peirce (1903 MS), CP 6.176: "But I now define a ''pseudo-continuum'' as that which modern writers on the theory of functions call a ''continuum''. But this is fully represented by [...] the totality of real values, rational and irrational [...]."</ref> that a true continuum is the real subject matter of ''analysis situs'' ([[topology]]); and that a true continuum of instants exceeds—and within any lapse of time has room for—any [[Aleph number]] (any infinite ''multitude'' as he called it) of instants.<ref>Peirce (1902 MS) and [[Joseph Morton Ransdell|Ransdell, Joseph]], ed. (1998), "Analysis of the Methods of Mathematical Demonstration", [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/ver1/l75v1-02.htm#m4 Memoir 4], Draft C, MS L75.90–102, see 99–100. (Once there, scroll down).</ref>
 
In 1908 Peirce wrote that he found that a true continuum might have or lack such room. Jérôme Havenel (2008): "It is on May 26, 1908, that Peirce finally gave up his idea that in every continuum there is room for whatever collection of any multitude. From now on, there are different kinds of continua, which have different properties."<ref>See:
* Peirce (1908), "Some Amazing Mazes (Conclusion), Explanation of Curiosity the First", ''The Monist'', v. 18, n. 3, pp. 416-64, see [http://books.google.com/books?id=CqsLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA463 463]-4. Reprinted CP 4.594-642, see 642.
* Havenel, Jérôme (2008), "Peirce's Clarifications on Continuity", ''Transactions'' Winter 2008 pp. 68–133, see 119. [http://www.jstor.org/pss/40321237 Abstract].</ref>
 
===Probability and statistics===
Peirce held that science achieves statistical probabilities, not certainties, and that spontaneity (absolute chance) is real (see [[Tychism]] on his view). Most of his statistical writings promote the [[Frequency probability|frequency interpretation]] of probability (objective ratios of cases), and many of his writings express skepticism about (and criticize the use of) [[statistical model|probability]] when such models are not based on objective [[randomization]].<ref>Peirce condemned the use of "certain [[likelihood function|likelihoods]]" (EP 2:108–9) even more strongly than he criticized [[Bayesian statistics|Bayesian methods]]. Indeed Peirce used a bit of [[Bayesian inference]] in criticizing parapsychology (W 6:76).</ref> Though Peirce was largely a frequentist, his [[possible world semantics]] introduced the [[propensity probability|"propensity" theory of probability]] before [[Karl Popper]].<ref>Miller, Richard W. (1975), "Propensity: Popper or Peirce?", ''[[British Journal for the Philosophy of Science]]'' ([http://bjps.oxfordjournals.org site]), v. 26, n. 2, pp. 123–32. {{doi|10.1093/bjps/26.2.123}}. [http://bjps.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/26/2/123.pdf Eprint].</ref><ref>[[Susan Haack|Haack, Susan]] and Kolenda, Konstantin (1977), "Two Fallibilists in Search of the Truth",  ''Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society'', Supplementary Volumes, v. 51, pp. 63–104. {{JSTOR|4106816}}</ref> Peirce (sometimes with [[Joseph Jastrow]]) investigated the [[Bayesian probability|probability judgments]] of experimental subjects, "perhaps the very first" elicitation and estimation of [[subjective probability|subjective probabilities]] in [[experimental psychology]] and (what came to be called) [[Bayesian statistics]].<ref name=Stigler78/>
 
Peirce was one of the [[founders of statistics]]. He formulated modern statistics in "[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#illus|Illustrations of the Logic of Science]]" (1877–8) and "[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#SIL|A Theory of Probable Inference]]" (1883). With a [[repeated measures design]], he introduced [[Blind experiment|blinded]], [[Randomized controlled trial|controlled randomized experiments]] in 1884 (Hacking 1990:205)<ref name=Hacking/> (before [[Ronald A. Fisher]]).<ref name=Stigler78/> He invented [[optimal design]] for experiments on gravity, in which he "[[analysis of variance|corrected the means]]". He used [[correlation]] and [[smoothing]]. Peirce extended the work on [[Peirce's criterion|outliers]] by [[Benjamin Peirce]], his father.<ref name=Stigler78/> He introduced terms "[[Confidence interval|confidence]]" and "[[Likelihood function|likelihood]]" (before [[Jerzy Neyman]] and [[Ronald A. Fisher|Fisher]]). (See [[Stephen Stigler]]'s historical books and [[Ian Hacking]] 1990<ref name=Hacking/>).
 
==Philosophy==
{{quote|It is not sufficiently recognized that Peirce's career was that of a scientist, not a philosopher; and that during his lifetime he was known and valued chiefly as a scientist, only secondarily as a logician, and scarcely at all as a philosopher. Even his work in philosophy and logic will not be understood until this fact becomes a standing premise of Peircean studies.|Max Fisch 1964, p. 486.<ref name=SP2/>}}
 
Peirce was a working scientist for 30 years, and arguably was a professional philosopher only during the five years he lectured at Johns Hopkins. He learned philosophy mainly by reading, each day, a few pages of [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]]'s ''[[Critique of Pure Reason]]'', in the original German, while a Harvard undergraduate. His writings bear on a wide array of disciplines, including [[mathematics]], [[logic]], [[philosophy]], [[statistics]], [[astronomy]],<ref name=SP2/> [[metrology]],<ref name=metr/> [[geodesy]], [[experimental psychology]],<ref name=psych/> [[economics]],<ref name=econom/> [[linguistics]],<ref name=ling/> and the [[history and philosophy of science]]. This work has enjoyed renewed interest and approval, a revival inspired not only by his anticipations of recent scientific developments but also by his demonstration of how philosophy can be applied effectively to human problems.
 
Peirce's philosophy includes (see below in related sections) a pervasive three-category system, belief that truth is immutable and is both independent from actual opinion ([[fallibilism]]) and discoverable (no radical skepticism), logic as formal semiotic on signs, on arguments, and on inquiry's ways—including philosophical [[pragmatism]] (which he founded), [[#Critical common-sensism|critical common-sensism]], and [[scientific method]]—and, in metaphysics: [[Philosophical realism|Scholastic realism]], belief in God, freedom, and at least an attenuated immortality, [[objective idealism]], and belief in the reality of continuity and of absolute chance, mechanical necessity, and creative love. In his work, fallibilism and pragmatism may seem to work somewhat like [[skepticism]] and [[positivism]], respectively, in others' work. However, for Peirce, fallibilism is balanced by an [[Pragmatism#antiskep|anti-skepticism]] and is a basis for belief in the reality of absolute chance and of continuity,<ref name=FCE>Peirce (1897) "Fallibilism, Continuity, and Evolution", CP 1.141–75 ([http://www.textlog.de/4248.html Eprint]), placed by the CP editors directly after "F.R.L." (1899, CP 1.135–40).</ref> and pragmatism commits one to anti-[[nominalist]] belief in the reality of the general (CP 5.453–7).
 
For Peirce, First Philosophy, which he also called cenoscopy, is less basic than mathematics and more basic than the special sciences (of nature and mind). It studies positive phenomena in general, phenomena available to any person at any waking moment, and does not settle questions by resorting to special experiences.<ref name=phil>Peirce (1903), CP 1.180-202 [https://web.archive.org/web/20111105121054/ Eprint] and (1906) "The Basis of Pragmaticism", EP 2:372–3, see "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/philosophy.html Philosophy]" at CDPT.</ref> He [[Classification of the sciences (Peirce)|divided]] such philosophy into (1) phenomenology (which he also called phaneroscopy or categorics), (2) normative sciences (esthetics, ethics, and logic), and (3) metaphysics; his views on them are discussed in order below.
 
===Theory of categories===
{{Main|Categories (Peirce)}}
 
On May 14, 1867, the 27-year-old Peirce presented a paper entitled "[http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/newlist/nl-frame.htm On a New List of Categories]" to the [[American Academy of Arts and Sciences]], which published it the following year. The paper outlined a theory of predication, involving three universal categories that Peirce developed in response to reading [[Aristotle]], [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]], and [[Hegel]], categories that Peirce applied throughout his work for the rest of his life.<ref name=Burch/> Peirce scholars generally regard the "New List" as foundational or breaking the ground for Peirce's "architectonic", his blueprint for a pragmatic philosophy. In the categories one will discern, concentrated, the pattern that one finds formed by the three grades of clearness in "[[s:How to Make Our Ideas Clear|How To Make Our Ideas Clear]]" (1878 paper foundational to pragmatism), and in numerous other trichotomies in his work.
 
"On a New List of Categories" is cast as a Kantian deduction; it is short but dense and difficult to summarize. The following table is compiled from that and later works.<ref>See in "Firstness", "Secondness", and "Thirdness" in [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html CDPT].</ref> In 1893, Peirce restated most of it for a less advanced audience.<ref>Peirce (1893), "The Categories" MS 403. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/bycsp.htm#NLOC-R Eprint], edited by [[Joseph Morton Ransdell|Joseph Ransdell]], with information on the re-write, and interleaved with the 1867 "New List" for comparison.</ref> {{C. S. Peirce categorial table}}
 
===Esthetics and ethics===
Peirce did not write extensively in esthetics and ethics,<ref>"[http://agora.phi.gvsu.edu/kap/CSP_Bibliography/CSP_norm_bib.pdf Charles S. Peirce on Esthetics and Ethics: A Bibliography]" (PDF) by Kelly A. Parker in 1999.</ref> but came by 1902 to hold that esthetics, ethics, and logic, in that order, comprise the normative sciences.<ref>Peirce (1902 MS), Carnegie Application, edited by Joseph Ransdell, [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/ver1/l75v1-02.htm Memoir 2], see table.</ref> He characterized esthetics as the study of the good (grasped as the admirable), and thus of the ends governing all conduct and thought.<ref>See [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/esthetics.html Esthetics] at CDPT.</ref>
 
==Philosophy: logic, or semiotic==
{{Semiotics}}
===Logic as philosophical===
Peirce regarded logic ''per se'' as a division of philosophy, as a normative science based on esthetics and ethics, as more basic than metaphysics,<ref name=FRL>Peirce (1899 MS), "F.R.L." [First Rule of Logic], CP 1.135–40, [https://web.archive.org/web/20120106071421/http://www.princeton.edu/~batke/peirce/frl_99.htm Eprint]</ref> and as "the art of devising methods of research".<ref name=ars>Peirce (1882), "Introductory Lecture on the Study of Logic" delivered September 1882, ''Johns Hopkins University Circulars'', v. 2, n. 19, pp. [http://books.google.com/books?id=E0YFAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA11&dq=%22art+of+devising+methods+of+research%22 11]–12 (via Google), November 1882. Reprinted (EP 1:210–14; W 4:378–82; CP 7.59–76). The definition of logic quoted by Peirce is by [[Peter of Spain]].</ref> More generally, as inference, "logic is rooted in the social principle", since inference depends on a standpoint that, in a sense, is unlimited.<ref>Peirce (1878), "The Doctrine of Chances", ''Popular Science Monthly'', v. 12, pp. 604–15 (CP 2.645–68, W 3:276–90, EP 1:142–54). {{quote|...death makes the number of our risks, the number of our inferences, finite, and so makes their mean result uncertain. The very idea of probability and of reasoning rests on the assumption that this number is indefinitely great. .... ...logicality inexorably requires that our interests shall ''not'' be limited. .... Logic is rooted in the social principle.}}</ref> Peirce called (with no sense of deprecation) "mathematics of logic" much of the kind of thing which, in current research and applications, is called simply "logic". He was productive in both (philosophical) logic and logic's mathematics, which were connected deeply in his work and thought.
 
Peirce argued that [[#fs|logic is formal semiotic]], the formal study of signs in the broadest sense, not only signs that are artificial, linguistic, or symbolic, but also signs that are semblances or are indexical such as reactions. Peirce held that "all this universe is perfused with signs, if it is not composed exclusively of signs",<ref>Peirce, CP 5.448 footnote, from "The Basis of Pragmaticism" in 1906.</ref> along with their representational and inferential relations. He argued that, since all thought takes time, all thought is in signs<ref name=QFM>Peirce, (1868), "Questions concerning certain Faculties claimed for Man", ''Journal of Speculative Philosophy'' v. 2, n. 2, [http://books.google.com/books?id=YHkqP2JHJ_IC&pg=RA1-PA103 pp. 103]-14. On thought in signs, see p. 112. Reprinted CP 5.213-63 (on thought in signs, see 253), W 2:193-211, EP 2:11-27. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/question/qu-frame.htm Eprint].</ref> and sign processes ("semiosis") such as the inquiry process. He [[Classification of the sciences (Peirce)|divided]] logic into: (1) speculative grammar, or stechiology, on how signs can be meaningful and, in relation to that, what kinds of signs there are, how they combine, and how some embody or incorporate others; (2) logical critic, or logic proper, on the modes of inference; and (3) speculative or [[universal rhetoric]], or methodeutic,<ref name=rhetoric/> the philosophical theory of inquiry, including pragmatism.
 
====Presuppositions of logic====
In his "F.R.L." [First Rule of Logic] (1899), Peirce states that the first, and "in one sense, the sole", rule of reason is that, ''to learn, one needs to desire to learn'' and desire it without resting satisfied with that which one is inclined to think.<ref name="FRL"/> So, the first rule is, ''to wonder''. Peirce proceeds to a critical theme in research practices and the shaping of theories:
:...there follows one [[corollary]] which itself deserves to be inscribed upon every wall of the city of philosophy:
<center>Do not block the way of inquiry.</center>
Peirce adds, that method and economy are best in research but no outright sin inheres in trying any theory in the sense that the investigation via its trial adoption can proceed unimpeded and undiscouraged, and that "the one unpardonable offence" is a philosophical barricade against truth's advance, an offense to which "metaphysicians in all ages have shown themselves the most addicted". Peirce in many writings holds that [[Classification of the sciences (Peirce)|logic precedes metaphysics]] (ontological, religious, and physical).
 
Peirce goes on to list four common barriers to inquiry: (1) Assertion of absolute certainty; (2) maintaining that something is absolutely unknowable; (3) maintaining that something is absolutely inexplicable because absolutely basic or ultimate; (4) holding that perfect exactitude is possible, especially such as to quite preclude unusual and anomalous phenomena. To refuse absolute theoretical certainty is the heart of ''fallibilism'', which Peirce unfolds into refusals to set up any of the listed barriers. Peirce elsewhere argues (1897) that logic's presupposition of fallibilism leads at length to the view that chance and continuity are very real ([[tychism]] and [[synechism]]).<ref name=FCE/>
 
The First Rule of Logic pertains to the mind's presuppositions in undertaking reason and logic, presuppositions, for instance, that truth and the real do not depend on yours or my opinion of them but do depend on representational relation and consist in the destined end in investigation taken far enough ([[#defs|see below]]). He describes such ideas as, collectively, hopes which, in particular cases, one is unable seriously to doubt.<ref>Peirce (1902), The Carnegie Institute Application, Memoir 10, MS L75.361-2, ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/ver1/l75v1-04.htm#m10 Eprint].</ref>
 
====Four incapacities====
<div class=infobox style="padding:5px;font-size:94%;width:auto">The ''Journal of Speculative Philosophy'' series (1868–69), including
* Questions concerning certain Faculties claimed for Man (1868)
* Some Consequences of Four Incapacities (1868)
* Grounds of Validity of the Laws of Logic: <br>Further Consequences of Four Incapacities (1869)</div> In three articles in 1868–69,<ref name=QFM/><ref name=SCFI>Peirce (1868), "Some Consequences of Four Incapacities", ''Journal of Speculative Philosophy'' v. 2, n. 3, [http://books.google.com/books?id=YHkqP2JHJ_IC&pg=RA1-PA140 pp. 140]-57. Reprinted CP 5.264-317, W 2:211-42, EP 1:28-55. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/conseq/cn-frame.htm Eprint].</ref><ref name=GVLL>Peirce, "Grounds of Validity of the Laws of Logic: Further Consequences of Four Incapacities", ''Journal of Speculative Philosophy'' v. II, n. 4, [http://books.google.com/books?id=YHkqP2JHJ_IC&pg=RA1-PA193 pp. 193]-208. Reprinted CP 5.318-357, W 2:242-272 (PEP [http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v2/w2/w2_23/v2_23.htm Eprint]), EP 1:56-82.</ref> Peirce rejected mere verbal or [[hyperbolic doubt]] and first or ultimate principles, and argued that we have (as he numbered them<ref name=SCFI/>):
# No power of introspection. All knowledge of the internal world comes by hypothetical reasoning from known external facts.
# No power of intuition (cognition without logical determination by previous cognitions). No cognitive stage is absolutely first in a process. All mental action has the form of inference.
# No power of thinking without signs. A cognition must be interpreted in a subsequent cognition in order to be a cognition at all.
# No conception of the absolutely incognizable.
(The above sense of the term "intuition" is almost Kant's, said Peirce. It differs from the current looser sense that encompasses instinctive or anyway half-conscious inference.)
 
Peirce argued that those incapacities imply the reality of the general and of the continuous, the validity of the modes of reasoning,<ref name=GVLL/> and the falsity of philosophical [[René Descartes|Cartesianism]] ([[#Against Cartesianism|see below]]).
 
Peirce rejected the conception (usually ascribed to Kant) of the unknowable thing-in-itself<ref name=SCFI /> and later said that to "dismiss make-believes" is a prerequisite for pragmatism.<ref>Peirce (1905), "What Pragmatism Is", ''The Monist'', v. XV, n. 2, pp. 161-81, [http://books.google.com/books?id=j6oLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA167 see 167]. Reprinted CP 5.411-37, see 416. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/whatis/whatpragis.htm Eprint].</ref>
 
====Logic as formal semiotic====
Peirce sought, through his wide-ranging studies through the decades, formal philosophical ways to articulate thought's processes, and also to explain the workings of science. These inextricably entangled questions of a dynamics of inquiry rooted in nature and nurture led him to develop his semiotic with very broadened conceptions of signs and inference, and, as its culmination, a theory of inquiry for the task of saying 'how science works' and devising research methods. This would be logic by the medieval definition taught for centuries: art of arts, science of sciences, having the way to the principles of all methods.<ref name=ars/> Influences radiate from points on parallel lines of inquiry in [[Aristotle]]'s work, in such ''<span lang=la>loci</span>'' as: the basic terminology of [[psychology]] in ''[[On the Soul]]''; the founding description of [[sign relation]]s in ''[[On Interpretation]]''; and the differentiation of [[inference]] into three modes that are commonly translated into English as ''[[Abductive reasoning|abduction]]'', ''[[Deductive reasoning|deduction]]'', and ''[[Inductive reasoning|induction]]'', in the ''[[Prior Analytics]]'', as well as inference by [[analogy]] (called ''<span lang=grc>paradeigma</span>'' by Aristotle), which Peirce regarded as involving the other three modes.
 
Peirce began writing on semiotic in the 1860s, around the time when he devised his system of three categories. He called it both ''[[semiotic]]'' and ''semeiotic''. Both are current in singular and plural. He based it on the conception of a triadic [[sign relation]], and defined ''[[semiosis]]'' as "action, or influence, which is, or involves, a cooperation of ''three'' subjects, such as a sign, its object, and its interpretant, this tri-relative influence not being in any way resolvable into actions between pairs".<ref>Peirce 1907, CP 5.484. Reprinted, EP 2:411 in "Pragmatism" (398–433).</ref> As to signs in thought, Peirce emphasized the reverse:
 
{{quote|To say, therefore, that thought cannot happen in an instant, but requires a time, is but another way of saying that every thought must be interpreted in another, or that all thought is in signs.|Peirce 1868.<ref name=QFM/>}}
Peirce held that all thought is in signs, issuing in and from interpretation, where 'sign' is the word for the broadest variety of conceivable semblances, diagrams, metaphors, symptoms, signals, designations, symbols, texts, even mental concepts and ideas, all as determinations of a mind or ''quasi-mind'', that which at least functions like a mind, as in the work of crystals or bees<ref>See "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/quasimind.html Quasi-mind]" in CDPT.</ref> — the focus is on sign action in general rather than on psychology, linguistics, or social studies (fields which he also pursued).
 
Inquiry is a kind of inference process, a manner of thinking and semiosis. Global divisions of ways for phenomena to stand as signs, and the subsumption of inquiry and thinking within inference as a sign process, enable the study of inquiry on semiotics' three levels:
 
# Conditions for meaningfulness. Study of significatory elements and combinations, their grammar.
# Validity, conditions for true representation. Critique of arguments in their various separate modes.
# Conditions for determining interpretations. Methodology of inquiry in its mutually interacting modes.
 
<span id=fs></span>Peirce uses examples often from common experience, but defines and discusses such things as assertion and interpretation in terms of philosophical logic. In a formal vein, Peirce said:
 
{{quote|''On the Definition of Logic''. Logic is ''formal semiotic''. A sign is something, ''A'', which brings something, ''B'', its ''interpretant'' sign, determined or created by it, into the same sort of correspondence (or a lower implied sort) with something, ''C'', its ''object'', as that in which itself stands to ''C''. This definition no more involves any reference to human thought than does the definition of a line as the place within which a particle lies during a lapse of time. It is from this definition that I deduce the principles of logic by mathematical reasoning, and by mathematical reasoning that, I aver, will support criticism of [[Weierstrass]]ian severity, and that is perfectly evident. The word "formal" in the definition is also defined. <br>&nbsp; &nbsp; —Peirce, "Carnegie Application", ''[[#NEM|The New Elements of Mathematics]]'' v. 4, p. 54.}}
 
===Signs===
{{Main|Semiotic elements and classes of signs (Peirce)}} {{See also|Representation (arts)#Peirce and representation|Sign (semiotics)#Triadic signs}}
A list of noted writings by Peirce on signs and sign relations is at [[Semiotic elements and classes of signs (Peirce)#References and further reading]].
 
====Sign relation====
Anything is a sign — not absolutely as itself, but instead in some relation or other. The ''[[sign relation]]'' is the key. It defines three roles encompassing (1) the sign, (2) the sign's subject matter, called its ''object'', and (3) the sign's meaning or ramification as formed into a kind of effect called its ''interpretant'' (a further sign, for example a translation). It is an irreducible ''[[triadic relation]]'', according to Peirce. The roles are distinct even when the things that fill those roles are not. The roles are but three; a sign of an object leads to one or more interpretants, and, as signs, they lead to further interpretants.
 
''Extension × intension = information.'' Two traditional approaches to sign relation, necessary though insufficient, are the way of ''[[Extension (semantics)|extension]]'' (a sign's objects, also called breadth, denotation, or application) and the way of ''[[intension]]'' (the objects' characteristics, qualities, attributes referenced by the sign, also called depth, [[Comprehension (logic)|comprehension]], significance, or connotation). Peirce adds a third, the way of ''[[Logic of information|information]]'', including change of information, to integrate the other two approaches into a unified whole.<ref>Peirce (1867), "Upon Logical Comprehension and Extension" (CP 2.391–426), ([http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v2/w2/w2_06/v2_06.htm W 2:70–86]).</ref> For example, because of the equation above, if a term's total amount of information stays the same, then the more that the term 'intends' or signifies about objects, the fewer are the objects to which the term 'extends' or applies.
 
''Determination.'' A sign depends on its object in such a way as to represent its object — the object enables and, in a sense, determines the sign. A physically causal sense of this stands out when a sign consists in an indicative reaction. The interpretant depends likewise on both the sign and the object — an object determines a sign to determine an interpretant. But this determination is not a succession of dyadic events, like a row of toppling dominoes; sign determination is triadic. For example, an interpretant does not merely represent something which represented an object; instead an interpretant represents something ''as'' a sign representing the object. The object (be it a quality or fact or law or even fictional) determines the sign to an interpretant through one's collateral experience<ref name=collateral>See pp. 404–9 in "Pragmatism" in EP 2. Ten quotes on collateral experience from Peirce provided by Joseph Ransdell can be viewed [http://lyris.ttu.edu/read/messages?id=57101 here] at peirce-l's Lyris archive. Note: Ransdell's quotes from CP 8.178–9 are also in EP 2:493–4, which gives their date as 1909; and his quote from CP 8.183 is also in EP 2:495–6, which gives its date as 1909.</ref> with the object, in which the object is found or from which it is recalled, as when a sign consists in a chance semblance of an absent object. Peirce used the word "determine" not in a strictly deterministic sense, but in a sense of "specializes," ''<span lang=de>bestimmt</span>'',<ref name=determined>Peirce, letter to William James, dated 1909, see EP 2:492.</ref> involving variable amount, like an influence.<ref name=Marty>See "[http://perso.numericable.fr/robert.marty/semiotique/76defeng.htm 76 definitions of the sign by C.S.Peirce]", collected by Robert Marty (U. of Perpignan, France).</ref> Peirce came to define representation and interpretation in terms of (triadic) determination.<ref>Peirce, A Letter to Lady Welby (1908), ''[[#SS|Semiotic and Significs]]'', pp. 80–1: {{quote|I define a Sign as anything which is so determined by something else, called its Object, and so determines an effect upon a person, which effect I call its Interpretant, that the latter is thereby mediately determined by the former. My insertion of "upon a person" is a sop to Cerberus, because I despair of making my own broader conception understood.}}</ref> The object determines the sign to determine another sign — the interpretant — to be related to the object ''as the sign is related to the object'', hence the interpretant, fulfilling its function as sign of the object, determines a further interpretant sign. The process is logically structured to perpetuate itself, and is definitive of sign, object, and interpretant in general.<ref name=Marty/>
 
====Semiotic elements====
Peirce held there are exactly three basic elements in semiosis (sign action):
# A ''sign'' (or ''representamen'')<ref>"Representamen", properly with the 'a' long and stressed ({{IPAc-en|r|ɛ|p|r|ə|z|ɛ|n|ˈ|t|eɪ|m|ən}} {{respell|rep-rə-zen|TAY|mən}}), was adopted ([[wikt:representamen|not coined]]) by Peirce as his technical term for the ''sign'' as covered in his theory, in case a divergence should come to light between his theoretical version and the popular senses of the word "sign". He eventually stopped using "representamen". See EP 2:272–3 and ''[[#SS|Semiotic and Significs]]'' p. 193, quotes in "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/representamen.html Representamen]" at CDPT.</ref> represents, in the broadest possible sense of "represents". It is something interpretable as saying something about something. It is not necessarily symbolic, linguistic, or artificial—a cloud might be a sign of rain for instance, or ruins the sign of ancient civilization.<ref>{{cite book|last=Eco|first=Umberto|title=Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language|year=1984|publisher=Indiana University Press|location=Bloomington & Indianapolis|isbn=978-0-253-20398-4|page=15}}</ref>  As Peirce sometimes put it (he defined ''sign'' at least 76 times<ref name=Marty/>), the sign stands ''for'' the object ''to'' the interpretant. A sign represents its object in some respect, which respect is the sign's ''ground''.<ref name=ground/>
# An ''object'' (or ''semiotic object'') is a subject matter of a sign and an interpretant. It can be anything thinkable, a quality, an occurrence, a rule, etc., even fictional, such as [[Prince Hamlet]].<ref name=fictive>Peirce (1909), A Letter to William James, EP 2:492-502. Fictional object, 498. Object as universe of discourse, 492. See "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/dynamicalobject.html Dynamical Object]" at CDPT.</ref> All of those are special or partial objects. The object most accurately is the [[universe of discourse]] to which the partial or special object belongs.<ref name=fictive/> For instance, a perturbation of Pluto's orbit is a sign about Pluto but ultimately not only about Pluto. An object either (i) is ''immediate'' to a sign and is the object as represented in the sign or (ii) is a ''dynamic'' object, the object as it really is, on which the immediate object is founded "as on bedrock".<ref>See "Immediate Object", etc., at [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html CDPT].</ref>
# An ''[[interpretant]]'' (or ''interpretant sign'') is a sign's meaning or ramification as formed into a kind of idea or effect, an interpretation, human or otherwise. An interpretant is a sign (a) of the object and (b) of the interpretant's "predecessor" (the interpreted sign) as a sign of the same object. An interpretant either (i) is ''immediate'' to a sign and is a kind of quality or possibility such as a word's usual meaning, or (ii) is a ''dynamic'' interpretant, such as a state of agitation, or (iii) is a ''final'' or ''normal'' interpretant, a sum of the lessons which a sufficiently considered sign ''would'' have as effects on practice, and with which an actual interpretant may at most coincide.
Some of the understanding needed by the mind depends on familiarity with the object. To know what a given sign denotes, the mind needs some experience of that sign's object, experience outside of, and collateral to, that sign or sign system. In that context Peirce speaks of collateral experience, collateral observation, collateral acquaintance, all in much the same terms.<ref name=collateral/>
 
====Classes of signs====
Among Peirce's many sign typologies, three stand out, interlocked. The first typology depends on the sign itself, the second on how the sign stands for its denoted object, and the third on how the sign stands for its object to its interpretant. Also, each of the three typologies is a three-way division, a [[Trichotomy (philosophy)|trichotomy]], via Peirce's three phenomenological [[#Theory of categories|categories]]: (1) quality of feeling, (2) reaction, resistance, and (3) representation, mediation.<ref name=9signs/>
 
I. ''Qualisign, sinsign, legisign'' (also called'' tone, token, type,'' and also called ''potisign, actisign, famisign''):<ref name=terms>On the varying terminology, look up in [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html CDPT].</ref> This typology classifies every sign according to the sign's own phenomenological category—the qualisign is a quality, a possibility, a "First"; the sinsign is a reaction or resistance, a singular object, an actual event or fact, a "Second"; and the legisign is a habit, a rule, a representational relation, a "Third".
 
II. ''Icon, index, symbol'': This typology, the best known one, classifies every sign according to the category of the sign's way of denoting its object—the icon (also called semblance or likeness) by a quality of its own, the index by factual connection to its object, and the symbol by a habit or rule for its interpretant.
 
III. ''Rheme, dicisign, argument'' (also called ''sumisign, dicisign, suadisign,'' also ''seme, pheme, delome,''<ref name=terms/> and regarded as very broadened versions of the traditional ''term, proposition, argument''): This typology classifies every sign according to the category which the interpretant attributes to the sign's way of denoting its object—the rheme, for example a term, is a sign interpreted to represent its object in respect of quality; the dicisign, for example a proposition, is a sign interpreted to represent its object in respect of fact; and the argument is a sign interpreted to represent its object in respect of habit or law. This is the culminating typology of the three, where the sign is understood as a structural element of inference.
{{C. S. Peirce ninefold sign table}}
Every sign belongs to one class or another within (I) ''and'' within (II) ''and'' within (III). Thus each of the three typologies is a three-valued parameter for every sign. The three parameters are not independent of each other; many co-classifications are absent, for reasons pertaining to the lack of either habit-taking or singular reaction in a quality, and the lack of habit-taking in a singular reaction. The result is not 27 but instead ten classes of signs fully specified at this level of analysis.
 
===Modes of inference===
{{Main|Inquiry}}
Borrowing a brace of concepts from [[Aristotle]], Peirce examined three basic modes of [[inference]] — ''[[abductive reasoning|abduction]]'', ''[[deductive reasoning|deduction]]'', and ''[[Inductive reasoning|induction]]'' — in his "critique of arguments" or "logic proper". Peirce also called abduction "retroduction", "presumption", and, earliest of all, "hypothesis". He characterized it as guessing and as inference to an explanatory hypothesis. He sometimes expounded the modes of inference by transformations of the categorical [[Syllogism#Barbara (AAA-1)|syllogism Barbara (AAA)]], for example in "Deduction, Induction, and Hypothesis" (1878).<ref>''Popular Science Monthly'', v. 13, pp. 470–82, see [http://books.google.com/books?id=u8sWAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA472 472] or [[s:Popular Science Monthly/Volume 13/August 1878/Illustrations of the Logic of Science VI|the book at Wikisource]]. CP 2.619–44, see 623.</ref> He does this by rearranging the ''rule'' (Barbara's major premiss), the ''case'' (Barbara's minor premiss), and the ''result'' (Barbara's conclusion):
 
{{col-begin}}
{{col-break}}
Deduction.
 
''Rule:'' All the beans from this bag are white. <br>
''Case:'' These beans are from this bag. <br>
<math>\therefore</math> ''Result:'' These beans are white.
{{col-break|width=1%}}
{{col-break}}
Induction.
 
''Case:'' These beans are &#91;randomly selected&#93; from this bag. <br>
''Result:'' These beans are white. <br>
<math>\therefore</math> ''Rule:'' All the beans from this bag are white.
{{col-break|width=1%}}
{{col-break}}
Hypothesis (Abduction).
 
''Rule:'' All the beans from this bag are white. <br>
''Result:'' These beans [oddly] are white. <br>
<math>\therefore</math> ''Case:'' These beans are from this bag.
{{col-end}}
 
Peirce 1883 in "A Theory of Probable Inference" (''[[#SIL|Studies in Logic]]'') equated hypothetical inference with the induction of characters of objects (as he had done in effect before<ref name=SCFI/>). Eventually dissatisfied, by 1900 he distinguished them once and for all and also wrote that he now took the syllogistic forms and the doctrine of logical extension and comprehension as being less basic than he had thought. In 1903 he presented the following logical form for abductive inference:<ref>See, under "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/abduction.html Abduction]" at CDPT, the following quotes:
* On correction of "A Theory of Probable Inference", see quotes from "Minute Logic", CP 2.102, c. 1902, and from the Carnegie Application (L75), 1902, ''Historical Perspectives on Peirce's Logic of Science'' v. 2, pp. 1031–1032.
* On new logical form for abduction, see quote from Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism, 1903, CP 5.188–189.
See also Santaella, Lucia (1997) "The Development of Peirce's Three Types of Reasoning: Abduction, Deduction, and Induction", 6th Congress of the [[IASS]]. [http://www.pucsp.br/~lbraga/epap_peir1.htm Eprint].</ref>
{{quote|The surprising fact, C, is observed;
:But if A were true, C would be a matter of course,
:Hence, there is reason to suspect that A is true.}}
The logical form does not also cover induction, since induction neither depends on surprise nor proposes a new idea for its conclusion. Induction seeks facts to test a hypothesis; abduction seeks a hypothesis to account for facts. "Deduction proves that something ''must'' be; Induction shows that something ''actually is'' operative; Abduction merely suggests that something ''may be''."<ref>"Lectures on Pragmatism", 1903, CP 5.171.</ref> Peirce did not remain quite convinced that one logical form covers all abduction.<ref>A Letter to J. H. Kehler (dated 1911), ''[[#NEM|The New Elements of Mathematics]]'' v. 3, pp. 203–4, see in "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/retroduction.html Retroduction]" at CDPT.</ref> In his [[methodeutic]] or theory of inquiry (see below), he portrayed abduction as an economic initiative to further inference and study, and portrayed all three modes as clarified by their coordination in essential roles in inquiry: hypothetical explanation, deductive prediction, inductive testing.
 
===Pragmatism===
{{Main|Pragmaticism|Pragmatic maxim|Pragmatic theory of truth#Peirce}}
<div class=infobox style="padding:5px;font-size:94%;width:auto">Some noted articles and lectures
* [[s:Author:Charles Sanders Peirce#Articles in The Popular Science Monthly Project|Illustrations of the Logic of Science]] (1877–78): <br>inquiry, pragmatism, statistics, inference
# The Fixation of Belief (1877)
# How to Make Our Ideas Clear (1878)
# The Doctrine of Chances (1878)
# The Probability of Induction (1878)
# The Order of Nature (1878)
# Deduction, Induction, and Hypothesis (1878)
* The Harvard lectures on pragmatism (1903)
* What Pragmatism Is (1905)
* Issues of Pragmaticism (1905)
* Pragmatism (1907 MS in EP 2)</div> Peirce's recipe for pragmatic thinking, which he called ''[[pragmatism]]'' and, later, ''[[pragmaticism]]'', is recapitulated in several versions of the so-called ''[[pragmatic maxim]]''. Here is one of his more [[Pragmatic maxim#2|emphatic reiterations]] of it:
 
{{quote|Consider what effects that might ''conceivably'' have practical bearings you ''conceive'' the objects of your ''conception'' to have. Then, your ''conception'' of those effects is the whole of your ''conception'' of the object.}}
 
As a movement, pragmatism began in the early 1870s in discussions among Peirce, [[William James]], and others in [[the Metaphysical Club]]. James among others regarded some articles by Peirce such as "[[s:The Fixation of Belief|The Fixation of Belief]]" (1877) and especially "[[s:How to Make Our Ideas Clear|How to Make Our Ideas Clear]]" (1878) as foundational to [[pragmatism]].<ref>James, William (1897), ''The Will to Believe'', see p. 124.</ref> Peirce (CP 5.11–12), like James (''[[s:Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking|Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking]]'', 1907), saw pragmatism as embodying familiar attitudes, in philosophy and elsewhere, elaborated into a new deliberate method for fruitful thinking about problems. Peirce differed from James and the early [[John Dewey]], in some of their tangential enthusiasms, in being decidedly more rationalistic and realistic, in several senses of those terms, throughout the preponderance of his own philosophical moods.
 
In 1905 Peirce coined the new name [[pragmaticism]] "for the precise purpose of expressing the original definition", saying that "all went happily" with James's and [[F.C.S. Schiller]]'s variant uses of the old name "pragmatism" and that he coined the new name because of the old name's growing use in "literary journals, where it gets abused". Yet he cited as causes, in a 1906 manuscript, his differences with James and Schiller and, in a 1908 publication, his differences with James as well as literary author [[Giovanni Papini]]'s declaration of pragmatism's indefinability. Peirce in any case regarded his views that truth is immutable and infinity is real, as being opposed by the other pragmatists, but he remained allied with them on other issues.<ref>See [[Pragmaticism#Pragmaticism's name]] for discussion and references.</ref>
 
Pragmatism begins with the idea that belief is that on which one is prepared to act. Peirce's pragmatism is a method of clarification of conceptions of objects. It equates any conception of an object to a conception of that object's effects to a general extent of the effects' conceivable implications for informed practice. It is a method of sorting out conceptual confusions occasioned, for example, by distinctions that make (sometimes needed) formal yet not practical differences. He formulated both pragmatism and statistical principles as aspects of scientific logic, in his "Illustrations of the Logic of Science" series of articles. In the second one, <span id=defs></span>"[[s:How to Make Our Ideas Clear|How to Make Our Ideas Clear]]", Peirce discussed three grades of clearness of conception:
# Clearness of a conception familiar and readily used, even if unanalyzed and undeveloped.
# Clearness of a conception in virtue of clearness of its parts, in virtue of which logicians called an idea "distinct", that is, clarified by analysis of just what makes it applicable. Elsewhere, echoing Kant, Peirce called a likewise distinct definition "nominal" (CP 5.553).
# Clearness in virtue of clearness of conceivable practical implications of the object's conceived effects, such as fosters fruitful reasoning, especially on difficult problems. Here he introduced that which he later called the [[pragmatic maxim]].
 
By way of example of how to clarify conceptions, he addressed conceptions about truth and the real as questions of the [[#Presuppositions of logic|presuppositions of reasoning]] in general. In clearness's second grade (the "nominal" grade), he defined truth as a sign's correspondence to its object, and the real as the object of such correspondence, such that truth and the real are independent of that which you or I or any actual, definite [[Community of inquiry|community of inquirers]] think. After that needful but confined step, next in clearness's third grade (the pragmatic, practice-oriented grade) he defined truth as that opinion which ''would'' be reached, sooner or later but still inevitably, by research taken far enough, such that the real does depend on that ideal final opinion—a dependence to which he appeals in theoretical arguments elsewhere, for instance for the long-run validity of the rule of induction.<ref name=Induction>"That the rule of induction will hold good in the long run may be deduced from the principle that reality is only the object of the final opinion to which sufficient investigation would lead", in Peirce (1878 April), "The Probability of Induction", p. [http://www.archive.org/stream/popscimonthly12yoummiss#page/728/mode/1up 718] (via ''Internet Archive'' ) in ''Popular Science Monthly'', v. 12, pp. 705–18. Reprinted in CP 2.669–93, W 3:290–305, EP 1:155–69, elsewhere.</ref> Peirce argued that even to argue against the independence and discoverability of truth and the real is to presuppose that there is, about that very question under argument, a truth with just such independence and discoverability.
 
Peirce said that a conception's meaning consists in "[[Pragmatic maxim#2|all general modes of rational conduct]]" implied by "acceptance" of the conception—that is, if one were to accept, first of all, the conception as true, then what could one conceive to be consequent general modes of rational conduct by all who accept the conception as true?—the whole of such consequent general modes is the whole meaning. His pragmatism does not equate a conception's meaning, its intellectual purport, with the conceived benefit or cost of the conception itself, like a meme (or, say, propaganda), outside the perspective of its being true, nor, since a conception is general, is its meaning equated with any definite set of actual consequences or upshots corroborating or undermining the conception or its worth. His pragmatism also bears no resemblance to "vulgar" pragmatism, which misleadingly connotes a ruthless and [[Machiavelli]]an search for mercenary or political advantage. Instead the pragmatic maxim is the heart of his pragmatism as a method of experimentational mental [[Pragmatic maxim#6|reflection]]<ref>Peirce (1902), CP 5.13 note 1.</ref> arriving at conceptions in terms of conceivable confirmatory and disconfirmatory circumstances—a method hospitable to the formation of explanatory hypotheses, and conducive to the use and improvement of verification.<ref>See CP 1.34 [http://www.textlog.de/4220.html Eprint] (in "The Spirit of Scholasticism"), where Peirce ascribed the success of modern science less to a novel interest in verification than to the improvement of verification.</ref>
 
Peirce's pragmatism, as method and theory of definitions and conceptual clearness, is part of his theory of inquiry,<ref>See [[Joseph Morton Ransdell|Joseph Ransdell]]'s comments and his tabular list of titles of Peirce's proposed list of memoirs in 1902 for his Carnegie application, [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/intro/l75intro.htm Eprint]</ref> which he variously called speculative, general, formal or [[universal rhetoric]] or simply methodeutic.<ref name=rhetoric>See [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/rhetoricspec.html rhetoric definitions] at CDPT.</ref> He applied his pragmatism as a method throughout his work.
 
====Theory of inquiry====
{{See also|Inquiry}}
 
=====Critical common-sensism=====
Critical common-sensism,<ref>Peirce (1905), "Issues of Pragmaticism", ''The Monist'', v. XV, n. 4, pp. [http://books.google.com/books?id=j6oLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA481-IA20 481]-99. Reprinted CP 5.438-63. Also important: CP 5.497-525.</ref> treated by Peirce as a consequence of his pragmatism, is his combination of [[Scottish School of Common Sense|Thomas Reid's common-sense philosophy]] with a [[fallibilism]] that recognizes that propositions of our more or less vague common sense now indubitable may later come into actual question, for example because of science's transformation of our world. It includes efforts to work up genuine doubts in tests for a core group of common indubitables that varies slowly if at all.
 
=====Rival methods of inquiry=====
In [[s:The Fixation of Belief|The Fixation of Belief]] (1877), Peirce described inquiry in general not as the pursuit of truth ''per se'' but as the struggle to move from irritating, inhibitory doubt born of surprise, disagreement, and the like, and to reach a secure belief, belief being that on which one is prepared to act. That let Peirce frame scientific inquiry as part of a broader spectrum and as spurred, like inquiry generally, by actual doubt, not mere verbal, quarrelsome, or [[hyperbolic doubt]], which he held to be fruitless. Peirce sketched '''four methods''' of settling opinion, ordered from least to most successful:
# The method of '''tenacity''' (policy of sticking to initial belief) — which brings comforts and decisiveness but leads to trying to ignore contrary information and others' views as if truth were intrinsically private, not public. The method goes against the social impulse and easily falters since one may well notice when another's opinion seems as good as one's own initial opinion. Its successes can be brilliant but tend to be transitory.
# The method of '''authority''' — which overcomes disagreements but sometimes brutally. Its successes can be majestic and long-lasting, but it cannot regulate people thoroughly enough to withstand doubts indefinitely, especially when people learn about other societies present and past.
# The method of the '''''a priori''''' — which promotes conformity less brutally but fosters opinions as something like tastes, arising in conversation and comparisons of perspectives in terms of "what is agreeable to reason." Thereby it depends on fashion in [[paradigm]]s and goes in circles over time. It is more intellectual and respectable but, like the first two methods, sustains accidental and capricious beliefs, destining some minds to doubt it.
# The method of '''science''' — wherein inquiry supposes that the real is discoverable but independent of particular opinion, such that, unlike in the other methods, inquiry can, by its own account, go wrong ([[fallibilism]]), not only right, and thus purposely tests itself and criticizes, corrects, and improves itself.
 
Peirce held that, in practical affairs, slow and stumbling ratiocination is often dangerously inferior to instinct and traditional sentiment, and that the scientific method is best suited to theoretical research,<ref>Peirce, "Philosophy and the Conduct of Life", Lecture 1 of the 1898 Cambridge (MA) Conferences Lectures, CP 1.616–48 in part and ''[[#RLT|Reasoning and the Logic of Things]]'', 105–22, reprinted in EP 2:27–41.</ref> which in turn should not be trammeled by the other methods and practical ends; reason's "first rule"<ref name=FRL/> is that, in order to learn, one must desire to learn and, as a corollary, must not block the way of inquiry. [[Scientific method]] excels the others finally by being deliberately designed to arrive — eventually — at the most secure beliefs, upon which the most successful practices can be based. Starting from the idea that people seek not truth ''per se'' but instead to subdue irritating, inhibitory doubt, Peirce showed how, through the struggle, some can come to submit to truth for the sake of belief's integrity, seek as truth the guidance of potential conduct correctly to its given goal, and wed themselves to the scientific method.
 
=====Scientific method=====
Insofar as clarification by pragmatic reflection suits explanatory hypotheses and fosters predictions and testing, pragmatism points beyond the usual duo of foundational alternatives: [[Deductive reasoning|deduction]] from self-evident truths, or ''[[rationalism]]''; and [[Inductive reasoning|induction]] from experiential phenomena, or ''[[empiricism]]''.
 
Peirce's approach, based in his critique of three [[#Modes of inference|modes of argument]], differs from approaches based in either [[foundationalism]] or [[coherentism]] about justification of claims, by a three-phase dynamic of inquiry:
 
# Active, [[Abductive reasoning|abductive]] genesis of theory, with no prior assurance of truth;
# Deductive application of the contingent theory so as to clarify its practical implications;
# Inductive testing and evaluation of the provisional theory's utility for the anticipation of future experience, in both senses: ''[[prediction]]'' and ''control''.
 
Thereby he fleshed out an approach to inquiry far more solid than the flatter image of inductive generalization ''<span lang=la>simpliciter</span>'', which is a mere relabeling of phenomenological patterns. Peirce's pragmatism was the first time the [[scientific method]] was proposed as an [[epistemology]] for philosophical questions.
 
A theory that succeeds better than its rivals in predicting and controlling our world is said to be nearer the truth. This is an operational notion of truth used by scientists.
 
Peirce extracted the pragmatic [[mental model|model]] or [[theory]] of inquiry from its raw materials in classical logic and refined it in parallel with the early development of symbolic logic to address problems about the nature of scientific reasoning.
 
Abduction, deduction, and induction make incomplete sense in isolation from one another but comprise a cycle understandable as a whole insofar as they collaborate toward inquiry's end. In the pragmatic way of thinking in terms of conceivable practical implications, every thing has a purpose, and its purpose is the first thing that we should try to note about it. Abduction hypothesizes an explanation for deduction to clarify into implications to be tested so that induction can evaluate the hypothesis, in the struggle to move from troublesome uncertainty to secure belief. No matter how traditional and needful it is to study the modes of inference in abstraction from one another, inquiry's [[integrity]] strongly limits the effective [[modularity (programming)|modularity]] of inquiry's principal components.
 
Peirce's outline of the scientific method in §III–IV of "A Neglected Argument"<ref name=NA>Peirce (1908), "[[s:A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God|A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God]]", published in large part, ''Hibbert Journal'' v. 7, 90–112. Reprinted with an unpublished part, CP 6.452–85, ''Selected Writings'' pp. 358–79, EP 2:434–50, ''Peirce on Signs'' 260–78.</ref> is summarized below (except as otherwise noted). There he also reviewed plausibility and inductive precision (issues of [[#Modes of inference|critique of arguments]]).
 
1. '''Abductive''' (or retroductive) phase. Guessing, inference to explanatory hypotheses for selection of those best worth trying. From abduction, Peirce distinguishes induction as inferring, on the basis of tests, the proportion of truth in the hypothesis. Every inquiry, whether into ideas, brute facts, or norms and laws, arises from surprising observations in one or more of those realms (and for example at any stage of an inquiry already underway). All explanatory content of theories comes from abduction, which guesses a new or outside idea so as to account in a simple, economical way for a surprising or complicated phenomenon. Oftenest even a well-prepared mind guesses wrong. But the modicum of success of our guesses far exceeds that of random luck, and seems born of attunement to nature by instincts developed or inherent, especially insofar as best guesses are optimally plausible and simple in the sense of the "facile and natural", as by [[Galileo]]'s natural light of reason and as distinct from "logical simplicity".<ref>See also Nubiola, Jaime (2004), "[http://www.unav.es/users/LumeNaturale.html Il Lume Naturale: Abduction and God]", ''Semiotiche'' I/2, 91–102.</ref> Abduction is the most fertile but least secure mode of inference. Its general rationale is inductive: it succeeds often enough and it has no substitute in expediting us toward new truths.<ref>Peirce (c. 1906), "PAP (Prolegomena to an Apology for Pragmatism)" (MS 293), ''[[#NEM|The New Elements of Mathematics]]'' v. 4, pp. 319–20, first quote under "[http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/abduction.html Abduction]" at CDPT.</ref> In 1903 Peirce called pragmatism "the logic of abduction".<ref>Peirce (1903), "Pragmatism – The Logic of Abduction", CP 5.195–205, especially 196. [http://www.textlog.de/7663.html Eprint].</ref> It points to efficiency. Coordinative method leads from abducing a plausible hypothesis to judging it for its testability<ref>Peirce, Carnegie application, MS L75.279-280: [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/ver1/l75v1-08.htm#m27 Memoir 27], Draft B.</ref> and for how its trial would economize inquiry itself.<ref name=econ>See MS L75.329–330, from Draft D of [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/l75/ver1/l75v1-08.htm#m27 Memoir 27] of Peirce's application to the Carnegie Institution: {{quote|Consequently, to discover is simply to expedite an event that would occur sooner or later, if we had not troubled ourselves to make the discovery. Consequently, the art of discovery is purely a question of economics. The economics of research is, so far as logic is concerned, the leading doctrine with reference to the art of discovery. Consequently, the conduct of abduction, which is chiefly a question of heuretic and is the first question of heuretic, is to be governed by economical considerations.}}</ref> The hypothesis, being insecure, needs to have practical implications leading at least to mental tests and, in science, lending themselves to scientific tests. A simple but unlikely guess, if uncostly to test for falsity, may belong first in line for testing. A guess is intrinsically worth testing if it has instinctive plausibility or reasoned objective probability, while [[Subjective probability|subjective likelihood]], though reasoned, can be misleadingly seductive. Guesses can be chosen for trial strategically, for their caution (for which Peirce gave as example the game of [[Twenty Questions]]), breadth, or incomplexity.<ref>Peirce, C. S., "On the Logic of Drawing Ancient History from Documents", EP 2, see 107-9. On Twenty Questions, see 109: {{quote|Thus, twenty skillful hypotheses will ascertain what 200,000 stupid ones might fail to do.}}</ref> One can hope to discover only that which time would reveal through a learner's sufficient experience anyway, so the point is to expedite it; economy of research is what demands the leap, so to speak, of abduction and governs its art.<ref name=econ/>
 
2. '''Deductive''' phase. Two stages:
:i. Explication. Unclearly premissed, but deductive, analysis of the hypothesis so as to render its parts as clear as possible.
:ii. Demonstration: Deductive Argumentation, [[Euclid]]ean in procedure. Explicit deduction of hypothesis's consequences as predictions about evidence to be found. [[Corollary|Corollarial]] or, if needed, Theorematic.
 
3. '''Inductive''' phase. Evaluation of the hypothesis, inferring from observational or experimental tests of its deduced consequences. The long-run validity of the rule of induction is deducible from the principle (presuppositional to reasoning in general) that the real "is only the object of the final opinion to which sufficient investigation would lead";<ref name=Induction/> anything to which no such process would ever lead would not be real. Induction involving the ongoing accumulation of evidence follows "a method which, sufficiently persisted in," will "diminish the error below any predesignate degree." Three stages:
:i. Classification. Unclearly premissed, but inductive, classing of objects of experience under general ideas.
:ii. Probation: direct Inductive Argumentation. Crude or Gradual. Crude Induction, founded on experience in one mass (CP 2.759), presumes that future experience on a question will not differ utterly from all past experience (CP 2.756). Gradual Induction makes a new estimate of the proportion of truth in the hypothesis after each test, and is Qualitative or Quantitative. Qualitative Induction depends on estimating the relative evidential weights of the various qualities of the subject class under investigation (CP 2.759; see also CP 7.114–20). Quantitative Induction depends on how often, in a fair sample of instances of ''S'', ''S'' is found actually accompanied by ''P'' that was predicted for ''S'' (CP 2.758). It depends on measurements, or statistics, or counting.
:iii. Sentential Induction. "...which, by Inductive reasonings, appraises the different Probations singly, then their combinations, then makes self-appraisal of these very appraisals themselves, and passes final judgment on the whole result".
 
=====Against Cartesianism=====
Peirce drew on the methodological implications of the [[#Four incapacities|four incapacities]] — no genuine introspection, no intuition in the sense of non-inferential cognition, no thought but in signs, and no conception of the absolutely incognizable — to attack philosophical [[René Descartes|Cartesianism]], of which he said that:<ref name=SCFI />
 
1. "It teaches that philosophy must begin in universal doubt" — when, instead, we start with preconceptions, "prejudices [...] which it does not occur to us ''can'' be questioned", though we may find reason to question them later. "Let us not pretend to doubt in philosophy what we do not doubt in our hearts."
 
2. "It teaches that the ultimate test of certainty is...in the individual consciousness" — when, instead, in science a theory stays on probation till agreement is reached, then it has no actual doubters left. No lone individual can reasonably hope to fulfill philosophy's multi-generational dream. When "candid and disciplined minds" continue to disagree on a theoretical issue, even the theory's author should feel doubts about it.
 
3. It trusts to "a single thread of inference depending often upon inconspicuous premisses" — when, instead, philosophy should, "like the successful sciences", proceed only from tangible, scrutinizable premisses and trust not to any one argument but instead to "the multitude and variety of its arguments" as forming, not a chain at least as weak as its weakest link, but "a cable whose fibers", soever "slender, are sufficiently numerous and intimately connected".
 
4. It renders many facts "absolutely inexplicable, unless to say that 'God makes them so' is to be regarded as an explanation"<ref>Peirce believed in God. See section [[#Philosophy: metaphysics]].</ref> — when, instead, philosophy should avoid being "unidealistic",<ref>However, Peirce disagreed with Hegelian [[absolute idealism]]. See for example CP 8.131.</ref> misbelieving that something real can defy or evade all possible ideas, and supposing, inevitably, "some absolutely inexplicable, unanalyzable ultimate", which explanatory surmise explains nothing and so is inadmissible.
 
==Philosophy: metaphysics==
<div class=infobox style="padding:5px;font-size:94%;width:auto">Some noted articles
* The ''Monist'' Metaphysical Series (1891–93)
** The Architecture of Theories (1891)
** The Doctrine of Necessity Examined (1892)
** The Law of Mind (1892)
** Man's Glassy Essence (1892)
** Evolutionary Love (1893)
* Immortality in the Light of Synechism (1893 MS)</div>
Peirce [[Classification of the sciences (Peirce)|divided]] metaphysics into (1) ontology or general metaphysics, (2) [[wikt:psychical|psychical]] or religious metaphysics, and (3) physical metaphysics.
 
'''Ontology.''' Peirce was a Scholastic Realist, declaring for the reality of generals as early as 1868.<ref>Peirce (1868), "Nominalism versus Realism", ''Journal of Speculative Philosophy'' v. 2, n. 1, pp. [http://books.google.com/books?id=YHkqP2JHJ_IC&pg=RA1-PA57 57]-61. Reprinted (CP 6.619–24), ([http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/writings/v2/w2/w2_14/v2_14.htm W 2:144–53]).</ref> Regarding modalities (possibility, necessity, etc.), he came in later years to regard himself as having wavered earlier as to just how positively real the modalities are. In his 1897 "The Logic of Relatives" he wrote: {{quote|I formerly defined the possible as that which in a given state of information (real or feigned) we do not know not to be true. But this definition today seems to me only a twisted phrase which, by means of two negatives, conceals an anacoluthon. We know in advance of experience that certain things are not true, because we see they are impossible.}} Peirce retained, as useful for some purposes, the definitions in terms of information states, but insisted that the pragmaticist is committed to a strong modal realism by conceiving of objects in terms of predictive general conditional propositions about how they ''would'' behave under certain circumstances.<ref>On developments in Peirce's realism, see:
* Peirce (1897), "The Logic of Relatives", ''The Monist'' v. VII, n. 2 pp. 161–217, see [http://books.google.com/books?id=pa0LAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA206 206] (via Google). Reprinted CP 3.456–552.
* Peirce (1905), "Issues of Pragmaticism", ''The Monist'' v. XV, n. 4, pp. 481–99, see [http://books.google.com/books?id=j6oLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA495 495–6] (via Google). Reprinted (CP 5.438–63, see 453–7).
* Peirce (c. 1905), Letter to Signor Calderoni, CP 8.205–13, see 208.
* Lane, Robert (2007), "Peirce's Modal Shift: From Set Theory to Pragmaticism", ''Journal of the History of Philosophy'', v. 45, n. 4.</ref>
 
'''Psychical or Religious Metaphysics.''' Peirce believed in God, and characterized such belief as founded in an instinct explorable in musing over the worlds of ideas, brute facts, and evolving habits — and it is a belief in God not as an ''actual'' or ''existent'' being (in Peirce's sense of those words), but all the same as a ''real'' being.<ref name=Godasreal>Peirce in his 1906 "Answers to Questions concerning my Belief in God", CP 6.495, [http://users.xplornet.com/~gnox/CSPgod.htm Eprint], reprinted in part as "The Concept of God" in ''Philosophical Writings of Peirce'', J. Buchler, ed., 1940, pp. 375–8: {{quote|I will also take the liberty of substituting "reality" for "existence." This is perhaps overscrupulosity; but I myself always use ''exist'' in its strict philosophical sense of "react with the other like things in the environment." Of course, in that sense, it would be fetichism to say that God "exists." The word "reality," on the contrary, is used in ordinary parlance in its correct philosophical sense. [....] I define the ''real'' as that which holds its characters on such a tenure that it makes not the slightest difference what any man or men may have ''thought'' them to be, or ever will have ''thought'' them to be, here using thought to include, imagining, opining, and willing (as long as forcible ''means'' are not used); but the real thing's characters will remain absolutely untouched.}}</ref> In "[[Wikisource:A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God|A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God]]" (1908),<ref name=NA/> Peirce sketches, for God's reality, an argument to a hypothesis of God as the Necessary Being, a hypothesis which he describes in terms of how it would tend to develop and become compelling in musement and inquiry by a normal person who is led, by the hypothesis, to consider as being purposed the features of the worlds of ideas, brute facts, and evolving habits (for example scientific progress), such that the thought of such purposefulness will "stand or fall with the hypothesis"; meanwhile, according to Peirce, the hypothesis, in supposing an "infinitely incomprehensible" being, starts off at odds with its own nature as a purportively true conception, and so, no matter how much the hypothesis grows, it both (A) inevitably regards itself as partly true, partly vague, and as continuing to define itself without limit, and (B) inevitably has God appearing likewise vague but growing, though God as the Necessary Being is not vague or growing; but the hypothesis will hold it to be ''more'' false to say the opposite, that God is purposeless. Peirce also argued that the will is free<ref>See his [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#MMS|"The Doctrine of Necessity Examined" (1892) and "Reply to the Necessitarians" (1893)]], to both of which editor [[Paul Carus]] responded.</ref> and (see [[Synechism]]) that there is at least an attenuated kind of immortality.
 
'''Physical Metaphysics.''' Peirce held the view, which he called [[objective idealism]], that "matter is effete mind, inveterate habits becoming physical laws".<ref>Peirce (1891), "The Architecture of Theories",'' [[The Monist]]'' v. 1, pp. [http://www.archive.org/stream/monistquart01hegeuoft#page/161/mode/1up 161]–76, see [http://www.archive.org/stream/monistquart01hegeuoft#page/170/mode/1up p. 170], via ''Internet Archive''. Reprinted (CP 6.7–34) and (EP 1:285–97, see p. 293).</ref> Peirce asserted the reality of (1) absolute chance (his [[Tychism|tychist]] view), (2) mechanical necessity (anancist view), and (3) that which he called the law of love ([[Agapism|agapist]] view), echoing his [[#Theory of categories|categories]] Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness, respectively. He held that fortuitous variation (which he also called "sporting"), mechanical necessity, and creative love are the three modes of evolution (modes called "tychasm", "anancasm", and "agapasm")<ref>See "tychism", "tychasm", "tychasticism", and the rest, at [http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html CDPT].</ref> of the cosmos and its parts. He found his conception of agapasm embodied in [[Lamarckism|Lamarckian evolution]]; the overall idea in any case is that of evolution tending toward an end or goal, and it could also be the evolution of a mind or a society; it is the kind of evolution which manifests workings of mind in some general sense. He said that overall he was a synechist, holding with reality of continuity,<ref>Peirce (1893), "Evolutionary Love", ''The Monist'' v. 3, pp. 176–200. Reprinted CP 6.278–317, EP 1:352–72. ''Arisbe'' [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/evolove/evolove.htm Eprint]</ref> especially of space, time, and law.<ref>See p. 115 in ''[[#RLT|Reasoning and the Logic of Things]]'' (Peirce's 1898 lectures).</ref>
 
==Science of review==
{{Main|Classification of the sciences (Peirce)}}
Peirce outlined two fields, "Cenoscopy" and "Science of Review", both of which he called philosophy. Both included philosophy about science.  In 1903 he arranged them, from more to less theoretically basic, thus:<ref name=phil/>
 
# Science of Discovery.
## Mathematics.
## Cenoscopy (philosophy as discussed earlier in this article—categorial, normative, metaphysical), as First Philosophy, concerns positive phenomena in general, does not rely on findings from special sciences, and includes the ''general'' study of inquiry and scientific method.
## Idioscopy, or the Special Sciences (of nature and mind).
# Science of Review, as Ultimate Philosophy, arranges "...the results of discovery, beginning with digests, and going on to endeavor to form a philosophy of science". His examples included  [[Alexander von Humboldt|Humboldt]]'s ''[[Alexander Von Humboldt#The .22Cosmos.22|Cosmos]]'', [[Auguste Comte|Comte]]'s ''<span lang=fr>Philosophie positive</span>'', and [[Herbert Spencer|Spencer]]'s ''Synthetic Philosophy''.
# Practical Science, or the Arts.
 
Peirce placed, within Science of Review, the work and theory of classifying the sciences (including mathematics and philosophy). His classifications, on which he worked for many years, draw on argument and wide knowledge, and are of interest both as a map for navigating his philosophy and as an accomplished polymath's survey of research in his time.
 
==See also==
{{col-begin}}
{{col-break}}
* [[Continuous predicate]]
* [[Entitative graph]]
* [[Hypostatic abstraction]]
* [[Idea#Charles Sanders Peirce]]
* [[Laws of Form]]
{{col-break}}
* [[List of American philosophers]]
* [[Logic of information]]
* [[Logical machine]]
* [[Logical matrix]]
* [[Mathematical psychology]]
{{col-break}}
* [[Normal distribution#Naming]]
* [[Peirce triangle]]
* [[Peirce's law]]
* [[Phaneron]]
* [[Pragmatics]]
{{col-break}}
* [[Problem of universals#Peirce]]
* [[Quantification#History]]
* [[Relation algebra]]
* [[Truth table]]
{{col-end}}
 
'''Contemporaries associated with Peirce'''
{{col-begin}}
{{col-break}}
* [[Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.]]
* [[Howland will forgery trial]]
{{col-break}}
* [[George Herbert Mead]]
* [http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/aboutcsp/nubiola/reyes.htm Ventura de los Reyes Prósper]
{{col-break}}
* [[Thorstein Veblen]]
{{col-end}}
 
==Notes==
{{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}
 
==External links==
{{Sister project links|v=no|b=no|n=no}}
[[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography]] has external links throughout to such materials as [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#Overviews and biographies|biographical and overview articles on Peirce]] at encyclopedias, study sites, etc.; [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#Books authored or edited by Peirce, published in his lifetime|individual works by Peirce]]; and [[Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography#External links|collections, bibliographies, and Peirce's definitions]] in the Baldwin dictionary.
 
Other useful sets of links:
* [[Existential graph#References|Existential graph references]] and external links.
* [[Pragmatism#External links|Pragmatism external links]].
* [[Semiotics#External links|Semiotics external links]].
;Peirce sites
{{Refbegin|colwidth=30em}}
{{C. S. Peirce external links}}
{{Refend}}
 
{{Logic}}
{{Statistics|collaspsed}}
{{Philosophy of science}}
{{Metaphysics}}
 
{{Authority control|VIAF=89203252|GND=118592459}}
 
{{Persondata <!--Metadata: see [[Wikipedia:Persondata]].-->
|NAME=Peirce, Charles Sanders
|ALTERNATIVE NAMES=Peirce, Charles Santiago Sanders
|SHORT DESCRIPTION=Logician, mathematician, philosopher, scientist
|DATE OF BIRTH=10 September 1839
|PLACE OF BIRTH=Cambridge, Massachusetts
|DATE OF DEATH=19 April 1914
|PLACE OF DEATH=Milford, Pennsylvania
}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Peirce, Charles Sanders}}
[[Category:1839 births]]
[[Category:1914 deaths]]
[[Category:People from Cambridge, Massachusetts]]
[[Category:American Episcopalians]]
[[Category:Pragmatists]]
[[Category:Members of the United States National Academy of Sciences]]
[[Category:19th-century American mathematicians]]
[[Category:20th-century American mathematicians]]
[[Category:19th-century philosophers]]
[[Category:20th-century philosophers]]
[[Category:American mathematicians]]
[[Category:American statisticians]]
[[Category:American logicians]]
[[Category:Philosophers of language]]
[[Category:American philosophers]]
[[Category:Geodesists]]
[[Category:Johns Hopkins University faculty]]
[[Category:Logicians]]
[[Category:Semioticians]]
[[Category:Philosophers of education]]
[[Category:Harvard University alumni]]
[[Category:Charles Sanders Peirce| ]]
[[Category:Lattice theorists]]
[[Category:Modal logicians]]
[[Category:Fellows of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences]]
[[Category:Christian philosophers]]
[[Category:Communication scholars]]
 
{{Link GA|de}}

Revision as of 01:51, 27 January 2014

Template:Pp-move-indef Vehicle Painter Batterton from Grande Prairie, likes to spend time becoming a child, property developers in new launch ec singapore and tutoring children. Is a travel maniac and recently took a vacation in Central Sikhote-Alin. Template:C. S. Peirce articles

Charles Sanders Peirce (Template:IPAc-en,[1] like "purse", September 10, 1839 – April 19, 1914) was an American philosopher, logician, mathematician, and scientist, sometimes known as "the father of pragmatism". He was educated as a chemist and employed as a scientist for 30 years. Today he is appreciated largely for his contributions to logic, mathematics, philosophy, scientific methodology, and semiotics, and for his founding of pragmatism.

In 1934, the philosopher Paul Weiss called Peirce "the most original and versatile of American philosophers and America's greatest logician".[2] Webster's Biographical Dictionary said in 1943 that Peirce was "now regarded as the most original thinker and greatest logician of his time."[3]

An innovator in mathematics, statistics, philosophy, research methodology, and various sciences, Peirce considered himself, first and foremost, a logician. He made major contributions to logic, but logic for him encompassed much of that which is now called epistemology and philosophy of science. He saw logic as the formal branch of semiotics, of which he is a founder. As early as 1886 he saw that logical operations could be carried out by electrical switching circuits; the same idea was used decades later to produce digital computers.[4] To safe the long run, there are quite a few funding options, one out of which is investing in new launch apartment property. In case you are planning to make investment in Singapore condominiums to safeguard your future, then now we have provide you with sure pros & cons of making funding in the apartment property for your help. Read these pros and cons before you resolve to make the funding at Duo Residences , Thomson View , or different condos.

In the end, New Hyde Park residents obtained their want to preserve the historical spot, and McDonald's had no other option but to revive the property to its former glory. Clara Kirk, who runs two ladies's shelters in Englewood, instructed DNAinfo the price of growing a property into something greater than a backyard or expanded yard might be a problem. The Mayor's officer informed HuffPost that under Chicago's Large Heaps program, candidates would wish to own a property for a minimum of five years before selling. Jade Residences is a new rare freehold residential property launching close to Serangoon MRT and situated at Lew Lian Vale. Benefit from the 50m Lap pool, Kids's Pool in this beautiful improvement. You are not obliged to proceed to buy. Woodlands EC Forestville @ Woodlands

Property investors may be typically categorized into 2 broad classes. These investing with a give attention to rental yield and those investing with a concentrate on capital beneficial properties. Seasoned investors tend to favor accomplished properties as it will probably instantly generate cash move when it comes to rental collections. But when your focus is on capital good points, new launches are inclined to have an important appreciation in worth by the time it HIGH. When a neighborhood developer launched a property in the east in mid-2011, as a substitute of using the standard trade apply minidvd.nl of balloting for the sequence to select a flat, their marketing agent requested interested buyers to line up in front of the gross sales gallery. ROI = (month-to-month rental – mortgage reimbursement – upkeep charge – property tax) x 12 ÷ preliminary funding

Reductions are usually given in the course of the preview, like 5~10% of the list value. Regardless of the xx% discounts (fluctuate from developers to developers), the bottom line is the enticing PSF you may enjoy to buy on the very Preview day. Another benefit is that you've the precedence to decide on your selection unit should no one else choose the same. In a hot property market, many units are snapped up at VIP Preview day, while some initiatives are absolutely sold even earlier than the public come to know about it.

After acquiring a Sale License (subject to government circumstances meant to protect folks shopping for property in Singapore), he might proceed to promote models in his development. Property Launches Listings Map (Singapore & Iskandar Malaysia) - All Properties Listed In SGDevelopersale.com Buyers do NOT, and will NOT, need to pay any agent any price, when buying property in Singapore. PropertyLaunch.sg , is a web site with the aims to supply quality, correct and nicely presented info to all our clients or anybody who are keen on new property launches in Singapore. Marina One Residences By Malaysia Khazanah & Singapore Temasek. SINGAPORE – Singaporeans are streets ahead of every other group of foreigners snapping up property developed by UEM Dawn at Iskandar Malaysia.

RC Suites is an elegant residential and industrial development for the discerning individual who values trendy dwelling in stunning environment. With a daring up to date facade housing 45 cosy flats, providing the perfect residing spaces for younger upwardly cellular professionals.28 RC Suites is near NE8 Farrer Park MRT Station and never removed from several Faculties such as Farrer Park Primary College,Stamford Primary College and Service Hospital Connexion.

After close to 1 / 4-century of doing enterprise at the Denton House in New Hyde Park, although, McDonald's appears to be getting alongside simply high quality with the area people, and residents who originally had an issue with the franchise being there have made the correct changes to get by. As a part of the Inexperienced and Wholesome Chicago Neighborhoods initiative approved by the Chicago Plan Fee Thursday, the specific Giant Tons pilot program will allow qualifying residents and nonprofits to buy metropolis-owned vacant lots for $1 in the Englewood neighborhood on the South Facet. For years, $1 lot programs have cropped up in different cities around the nation. The principles and necessities range, but what they all have in frequent is the next-to-nothing worth.

Life

Peirce's birthplace. Now Lesley University's Graduate School of Arts and Social Sciences

Peirce was born at 3 Phillips Place in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He was the son of Sarah Hunt Mills and Benjamin Peirce, himself a professor of astronomy and mathematics at Harvard University and perhaps the first serious research mathematician in America. At age 12, Charles read his older brother's copy of Richard Whately's Elements of Logic, then the leading English-language text on the subject. So began his lifelong fascination with logic and reasoning.[5] He went on to earn the B.A. and M.A. from Harvard; in 1863 the Lawrence Scientific School awarded him a B.Sc. that was Harvard's first summa cum laude chemistry degree;[6] and otherwise his academic record was undistinguished.[7] At Harvard, he began lifelong friendships with Francis Ellingwood Abbot, Chauncey Wright, and William James.[8] One of his Harvard instructors, Charles William Eliot, formed an unfavorable opinion of Peirce. This opinion proved fateful, because Eliot, while President of Harvard 1869–1909—a period encompassing nearly all of Peirce's working life—repeatedly vetoed Harvard's employing Peirce in any capacity.[9]

Peirce suffered from his late teens onward from a nervous condition then known as "facial neuralgia", which would today be diagnosed as trigeminal neuralgia. Brent says that when in the throes of its pain "he was, at first, almost stupefied, and then aloof, cold, depressed, extremely suspicious, impatient of the slightest crossing, and subject to violent outbursts of temper".[10] Its consequences may have led to the social isolation which made his life's later years so tragic.

Early employment

Between 1859 and 1891, Peirce was intermittently employed in various scientific capacities by the United States Coast Survey,[11] where he enjoyed his highly influential father's protection[12] until the latter's death in 1880. That employment exempted Peirce from having to take part in the Civil War; it would have been very awkward for him to do so, as the Boston Brahmin Peirces sympathized with the Confederacy.[13] At the Survey, he worked mainly in geodesy and gravimetry, refining the use of pendulums to determine small local variations in the Earth's gravity.[11] He was elected a resident fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in January 1867.[14] The Survey sent him to Europe five times,[15] first in 1871 as part of a group sent to observe a solar eclipse; there, he sought out Augustus De Morgan, William Stanley Jevons, and William Kingdon Clifford,[16] British mathematicians and logicians whose turn of mind resembled his own. From 1869 to 1872, he was employed as an Assistant in Harvard's astronomical observatory, doing important work on determining the brightness of stars and the shape of the Milky Way.[17] On April 20, 1877 he was elected a member of the National Academy of Sciences.[18] Also in 1877, he proposed measuring the meter as so many wavelengths of light of a certain frequency,[19] the kind of definition employed from 1860 to 1883.

During the 1880s, Peirce's indifference to bureaucratic detail waxed while his Survey work's quality and timeliness waned. Peirce took years to write reports that he should have completed in months.Template:According to whom Meanwhile, he wrote entries, ultimately thousands during 1883–1909, on philosophy, logic, science, and other subjects for the encyclopedic Century Dictionary.[20] In 1885, an investigation by the Allison Commission exonerated Peirce, but led to the dismissal of Superintendent Julius Hilgard and several other Coast Survey employees for misuse of public funds.[21] In 1891, Peirce resigned from the Coast Survey at Superintendent Thomas Corwin Mendenhall's request.[22] He never again held regular employment.

Johns Hopkins University

In 1879, Peirce was appointed Lecturer in logic at the new Johns Hopkins University, which had strong departments in a number of areas that interested him, such as philosophy (Royce and Dewey completed their PhDs at Hopkins), psychology (taught by G. Stanley Hall and studied by Joseph Jastrow, who coauthored a landmark empirical study with Peirce), and mathematics (taught by J. J. Sylvester, who came to admire Peirce's work on mathematics and logic). 1883 saw publication of his Studies in Logic by Members of the Johns Hopkins University containing works by himself and Allan Marquand, Christine Ladd, Benjamin Ives Gilman, and Oscar Howard Mitchell, several of whom were his graduate students.[23] Peirce's nontenured position at Hopkins was the only academic appointment he ever held.

Brent documents something Peirce never suspected, namely that his efforts to obtain academic employment, grants, and scientific respectability were repeatedly frustrated by the covert opposition of a major Canadian-American scientist of the day, Simon Newcomb.[24] Peirce's efforts may also have been hampered by a difficult personality; Brent conjectures as to further psychological difficulty.[25]

Peirce's personal life worked against his professional success. After his first wife, Harriet Melusina Fay ("Zina"), left him in 1875,[26] Peirce, while still legally married, became involved with Juliette, whose name, given variously as Froissy and Pourtalai[27] and nationality (she spoke French[28]) remain uncertain.[29] When his divorce from Zina became final in 1883, he married Juliette.[30] That year, Newcomb pointed out to a Johns Hopkins trustee that Peirce, while a Hopkins employee, had lived and traveled with a woman to whom he was not married; the ensuing scandal led to his dismissal in January 1884.[31] Over the years Peirce sought academic employment at various universities without success.[32] He had no children by either marriage.[33]

Cambridge, where Peirce was born and raised, New York City, where he often visited and sometimes lived, and Milford, where he spent the later years of his life with his second wife Juliette.
Juliette and Charles by a well at their home Arisbe in 1907

Poverty

In 1887 Peirce spent part of his inheritance from his parents to buy Template:Convert of rural land near Milford, Pennsylvania, which never yielded an economic return.[34] There he had an 1854 farmhouse remodeled to his design.[35] The Peirces named the property "Arisbe". There they lived with few interruptions for the rest of their lives,[36] Charles writing prolifically, much of it unpublished to this day (see Works). Living beyond their means soon led to grave financial and legal difficulties.[37] He spent much of his last two decades unable to afford heat in winter and subsisting on old bread donated by the local baker. Unable to afford new stationery, he wrote on the verso side of old manuscripts. An outstanding warrant for assault and unpaid debts led to his being a fugitive in New York City for a while.[38] Several people, including his brother James Mills Peirce[39] and his neighbors, relatives of Gifford Pinchot, settled his debts and paid his property taxes and mortgage.[40]

Peirce did some scientific and engineering consulting and wrote much for meager pay, mainly encyclopedic dictionary entries, and reviews for The Nation (with whose editor, Wendell Phillips Garrison, he became friendly). He did translations for the Smithsonian Institution, at its director Samuel Langley's instigation. Peirce also did substantial mathematical calculations for Langley's research on powered flight. Hoping to make money, Peirce tried inventing.[41] He began but did not complete a number of books.[42] In 1888, President Grover Cleveland appointed him to the Assay Commission.[43]

Arisbe in 2011

From 1890 on, he had a friend and admirer in Judge Francis C. Russell of Chicago,[44] who introduced Peirce to editor Paul Carus and owner Edward C. Hegeler of the pioneering American philosophy journal The Monist, which eventually published at least 14 articles by Peirce.[45] He wrote many texts in James Mark Baldwin's Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology (1901–5); half of those credited to him appear to have been written actually by Christine Ladd-Franklin under his supervision.[46] He applied in 1902 to the newly formed Carnegie Institution for a grant to write a systematic book of his life's work. The application was doomed; his nemesis Newcomb served on the Institution's executive committee, and its President had been the President of Johns Hopkins at the time of Peirce's dismissal.[47]

The one who did the most to help Peirce in these desperate times was his old friend William James, dedicating his Will to Believe (1897) to Peirce, and arranging for Peirce to be paid to give two series of lectures at or near Harvard (1898 and 1903).[48] Most important, each year from 1907 until James's death in 1910, James wrote to his friends in the Boston intelligentsia to request financial aid for Peirce; the fund continued even after James died. Peirce reciprocated by designating James's eldest son as his heir should Juliette predecease him.[49] It has been believed that this was also why Peirce used "Santiago" ("St. James" in English) as a middle name, but he appeared in print as early as 1890 as Charles Santiago Peirce. (See Charles Santiago Sanders Peirce for discussion and references).

Peirce died destitute in Milford, Pennsylvania, twenty years before his widow.

Reception

Bertrand Russell (1959) wrote,[50] "Beyond doubt [...] he was one of the most original minds of the later nineteenth century, and certainly the greatest American thinker ever." (Russell and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica, published from 1910 to 1913, does not mention Peirce; Peirce's work was not widely known till later.)[51] A. N. Whitehead, while reading some of Peirce's unpublished manuscripts soon after arriving at Harvard in 1924, was struck by how Peirce had anticipated his own "process" thinking. (On Peirce and process metaphysics, see Lowe 1964.[17]) Karl Popper viewed Peirce as "one of the greatest philosophers of all times".[52] Yet Peirce's achievements were not immediately recognized. His imposing contemporaries William James and Josiah Royce[53] admired him, and Cassius Jackson Keyser at Columbia and C. K. Ogden wrote about Peirce with respect, but to no immediate effect.

The first scholar to give Peirce his considered professional attention was Royce's student Morris Raphael Cohen, the editor of an anthology of Peirce's writings titled Chance, Love, and Logic (1923) and the author of the first bibliography of Peirce's scattered writings.[54] John Dewey studied under Peirce at Johns Hopkins[23] and, from 1916 onwards, Dewey's writings repeatedly mention Peirce with deference. His 1938 Logic: The Theory of Inquiry is much influenced by Peirce.[55] The publication of the first six volumes of the Collected Papers (1931–35), the most important event to date in Peirce studies and one that Cohen made possible by raising the needed funds,[56] did not prompt an outpouring of secondary studies. The editors of those volumes, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss, did not become Peirce specialists. Early landmarks of the secondary literature include the monographs by Buchler (1939), Feibleman (1946), and Goudge (1950), the 1941 Ph.D. thesis by Arthur W. Burks (who went on to edit volumes 7 and 8), and the studies edited by Wiener and Young (1952). The Charles S. Peirce Society was founded in 1946. Its Transactions, an academic quarterly specializing in Peirce, pragmatism, and American philosophy, has appeared since 1965.

In 1949, while doing unrelated archival work, the historian of mathematics Carolyn Eisele (1902–2000) chanced on an autograph letter by Peirce. So began her 40 years of research on Peirce the mathematician and scientist, culminating in Eisele (1976, 1979, 1985). Beginning around 1960, the philosopher and historian of ideas Max Fisch (1900–1995) emerged as an authority on Peirce; Fisch (1986)[57] includes many of his relevant articles, including a wide-ranging survey (Fisch 1986: 422–48) of the impact of Peirce's thought through 1983.

Peirce has gained a significant international following, marked by university research centers devoted to Peirce studies and pragmatism in Brazil (CeneP/CIEP), Finland ([[#CDPT|HPRC, including Template:Not a typo]]), Germany (Wirth's group, Hoffman's and Otte's group, and Deuser's and Härle's group[58]), France (L'I.R.S.C.E.), Spain (GEP), and Italy (CSP). His writings have been translated into several languages, including German, French, Finnish, Spanish, and Swedish. Since 1950, there have been French, Italian, Spanish, British, and Brazilian Peirceans of note. For many years, the North American philosophy department most devoted to Peirce was the University of Toronto's, thanks in good part to the leadership of Thomas Goudge and David Savan. In recent years, U.S. Peirce scholars have clustered at Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis, home of the Peirce Edition Project (PEP), and the Pennsylvania State University.

31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.

Works

Peirce's reputation rests largely on a number of academic papers published in American scientific and scholarly journals such as Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Journal of Speculative Philosophy, The Monist, Popular Science Monthly, the American Journal of Mathematics, Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences, The Nation, and others. See Articles by Peirce, published in his lifetime for an extensive list with links to them online. The only full-length book (neither extract nor pamphlet) that Peirce authored and saw published in his lifetime[59] was Photometric Researches (1878), a 181-page monograph on the applications of spectrographic methods to astronomy. While at Johns Hopkins, he edited Studies in Logic (1883), containing chapters by himself and his graduate students. Besides lectures during his years (1879–1884) as Lecturer in Logic at Johns Hopkins, he gave at least nine series of lectures, many now published; see Lectures by Peirce.

Harvard University obtained from Peirce's widow soon after his death the papers found in his study, but did not microfilm them until 1964. Only after Richard Robin (1967)[60] catalogued this Nachlass did it become clear that Peirce had left approximately 1650 unpublished manuscripts, totaling over 100,000 pages,[61] mostly still unpublished except on microfilm. On the vicissitudes of Peirce's papers, see Houser (1989).[62] Reportedly the papers remain in unsatisfactory condition.[63]

The first published anthology of Peirce's articles was the one-volume Chance, Love and Logic: Philosophical Essays, edited by Morris Raphael Cohen, 1923, still in print. Other one-volume anthologies were published in 1940, 1957, 1958, 1972, 1994, and 2009, most still in print. The main posthumous editions[64] of Peirce's works in their long trek to light, often multi-volume, and some still in print, have included:

1931–58: Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (CP), 8 volumes, includes many published works, along with a selection of previously unpublished work and a smattering of his correspondence. This long-time standard edition drawn from Peirce's work from the 1860s to 1913 remains the most comprehensive survey of his prolific output from 1893 to 1913. It is organized thematically, but texts (including lecture series) are often split up across volumes, while texts from various stages in Peirce's development are often combined, requiring frequent visits to editors' notes.[65] Edited (1–6) by Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss and (7–8) by Arthur Burks, in print and online.

1975–87: Charles Sanders Peirce: Contributions to The Nation, 4 volumes, includes Peirce's more than 300 reviews and articles published 1869–1908 in The Nation. Edited by Kenneth Laine Ketner and James Edward Cook, online.

1976: The New Elements of Mathematics by Charles S. Peirce, 4 volumes in 5, included many previously unpublished Peirce manuscripts on mathematical subjects, along with Peirce's important published mathematical articles. Edited by Carolyn Eisele, out of print.

1977: Semiotic and Significs: The Correspondence between C. S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby (2nd edition 2001), included Peirce's entire correspondence (1903–1912) with Victoria, Lady Welby. Peirce's other published correspondence is largely limited to the 14 letters included in volume 8 of the Collected Papers, and the 20-odd pre-1890 items included so far in the Writings. Edited by Charles S. Hardwick with James Cook, out of print.

1982–now: Writings of Charles S. Peirce, A Chronological Edition (W), Volumes 1–6 & 8, of a projected 30. The limited coverage, and defective editing and organization, of the Collected Papers led Max Fisch and others in the 1970s to found the Peirce Edition Project (PEP), whose mission is to prepare a more complete critical chronological edition. Only seven volumes have appeared to date, but they cover the period from 1859–1892, when Peirce carried out much of his best-known work. W 8 was published in November 2010; and work continues on W 7, 9, and 11. In print and online.

1985: Historical Perspectives on Peirce's Logic of Science: A History of Science, 2 volumes. Auspitz has said,[66] "The extent of Peirce's immersion in the science of his day is evident in his reviews in the Nation [...] and in his papers, grant applications, and publishers' prospectuses in the history and practice of science", referring latterly to Historical Perspectives. Edited by Carolyn Eisele, out of print.

1992: Reasoning and the Logic of Things collects in one place Peirce's 1898 series of lectures invited by William James. Edited by Kenneth Laine Ketner, with commentary by Hilary Putnam, in print.

1992–98: The Essential Peirce (EP), 2 volumes, is an important recent sampler of Peirce's philosophical writings. Edited (1) by Nathan Hauser and Christian Kloesel and (2) by PEP editors, in print.

1997: Pragmatism as a Principle and Method of Right Thinking collects Peirce's 1903 Harvard "Lectures on Pragmatism" in a study edition, including drafts, of Peirce's lecture manuscripts, which had been previously published in abridged form; the lectures now also appear in EP 2. Edited by Patricia Ann Turisi, in print.

2010: Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Writings collects important writings by Peirce on the subject, many not previously in print. Edited by Matthew E. Moore, in print.

Mathematics

The Peirce quincuncial projection of a sphere keeps angles true except at several isolated points and results in less distortion of area than in other projections.

Peirce's most important work in pure mathematics was in logical and foundational areas. He also worked on linear algebra, matrices, various geometries, topology and Listing numbers, Bell numbers, graphs, the four-color problem, and the nature of continuity.

He worked on applied mathematics in economics, engineering, and map projections (such as the Peirce quincuncial projection), and was especially active in probability and statistics.[67]

Discoveries

Peirce made a number of striking discoveries in formal logic and foundational mathematics, nearly all of which came to be appreciated only long after he died:

In 1860[68] he suggested a cardinal arithmetic for infinite numbers, years before any work by Georg Cantor (who completed his dissertation in 1867) and without access to Bernard Bolzano's 1851 (posthumous) Paradoxien des Unendlichen.

The Peirce arrow,
symbol for "(neither)...nor...", also called the Quine dagger.

In 1880–81[69] he showed how Boolean algebra could be done via a repeated sufficient single binary operation (logical NOR), anticipating Henry M. Sheffer by 33 years. (See also De Morgan's Laws).

In 1881[70] he set out the axiomatization of natural number arithmetic, a few years before Richard Dedekind and Giuseppe Peano. In the same paper Peirce gave, years before Dedekind, the first purely cardinal definition of a finite set in the sense now known as "Dedekind-finite", and implied by the same stroke an important formal definition of an infinite set (Dedekind-infinite), as a set that can be put into a one-to-one correspondence with one of its proper subsets.

In 1885[71] he distinguished between first-order and second-order quantification.[72][73] In the same paper he set out what can be read as the first (primitive) axiomatic set theory, anticipating Zermelo by about two decades (Brady 2000,[74] pp. 132–3).

In 1886 he saw that Boolean calculations could be carried out via electrical switches,[4] anticipating Claude Shannon by more than 50 years.

Existential graphs: Alpha graphs

By the later 1890s[75] he was devising existential graphs, a diagrammatic notation for the predicate calculus. Based on them are John F. Sowa's conceptual graphs and Sun-Joo Shin's diagrammatic reasoning.

The New Elements of Mathematics

Peirce wrote drafts for an introductory textbook, with the working title The New Elements of Mathematics, that presented mathematics from an original standpoint. Those drafts and many other of his previously unpublished mathematical manuscripts finally appeared[67] in The New Elements of Mathematics by Charles S. Peirce (1976), edited by mathematician Carolyn Eisele.

Nature of mathematics

Peirce agreed with Auguste Comte in regarding mathematics as more basic than philosophy and the special sciences (of nature and mind). Peirce classified mathematics into three subareas: (1) mathematics of logic, (2) discrete series, and (3) pseudo-continua (as he called them, including the real numbers) and continua. Influenced by his father Benjamin, Peirce argued that mathematics studies purely hypothetical objects and is not just the science of quantity but is more broadly the science which draws necessary conclusions; that mathematics aids logic, not vice versa; and that logic itself is part of philosophy and is the science about drawing conclusions necessary and otherwise.[76]

Mathematics of logic

Mathematical logic and foundations, some noted articles
  • On an Improvement in Boole's Calculus of Logic (1867)
  • Description of a Notation for the Logic of Relatives (1870)
  • On the Algebra of Logic (1880)
  • A Boolean Algebra with One Constant (1880 MS)
  • On the Logic of Number (1881)
  • Note B: The Logic of Relatives (1883)
  • On the Algebra of Logic: A Contribution to the
    Philosophy of Notation (1884/1885)
  • The Logic of Relatives (1897)
  • The Simplest Mathematics (1902 MS)
  • Prolegomena To an Apology For Pragmaticism (1906,
    on existential graphs)

Beginning with his first paper on the "Logic of Relatives" (1870), Peirce extended the theory of relations that Augustus De Morgan had just recently awakened from its Cinderella slumbers. Much of the mathematics of relations now taken for granted was "borrowed" from Peirce, not always with all due credit; on that and on how the young Bertrand Russell, especially his Principles of Mathematics and Principia Mathematica, did not do Peirce justice, see Anellis (1995).[51] In 1918 the logician C. I. Lewis wrote, "The contributions of C.S. Peirce to symbolic logic are more numerous and varied than those of any other writer — at least in the nineteenth century."[77] Beginning in 1940, Alfred Tarski and his students rediscovered aspects of Peirce's larger vision of relational logic, developing the perspective of relation algebra.

Relational logic gained applications. In mathematics, it influenced the abstract analysis of E. H. Moore and the lattice theory of Garrett Birkhoff. In computer science, the relational model for databases was developed with Peircean ideas in work of Edgar F. Codd, who was a doctoral student[78] of Arthur W. Burks, a Peirce scholar. In economics, relational logic was used by Frank P. Ramsey, John von Neumann, and Paul Samuelson to study preferences and utility and by Kenneth J. Arrow in Social Choice and Individual Values, following Arrow's association with Tarski at City College of New York.

On Peirce and his contemporaries Ernst Schröder and Gottlob Frege, Hilary Putnam (1982)[72] documented that Frege's work on the logic of quantifiers had little influence on his contemporaries, although it was published four years before the work of Peirce and his student Oscar Howard Mitchell. Putnam found that mathematicians and logicians learned about the logic of quantifiers through the independent work of Peirce and Mitchell, particularly through Peirce's "On the Algebra of Logic: A Contribution to the Philosophy of Notation"[71] (1885), published in the premier American mathematical journal of the day, and cited by Peano and Schröder, among others, who ignored Frege. They also adopted and modified Peirce's notations, typographical variants of those now used. Peirce apparently was ignorant of Frege's work, despite their overlapping achievements in logic, philosophy of language, and the foundations of mathematics.

Peirce's work on formal logic had admirers besides Ernst Schröder:

  • Philosophical algebraist William Kingdon Clifford[79] and logician William Ernest Johnson, both British;
  • The Polish school of logic and foundational mathematics, including Alfred Tarski;
  • Arthur Prior, who praised and studied Peirce's logical work in a 1964 paper[17] and in Formal Logic (saying on page 4 that Peirce "perhaps had a keener eye for essentials than any other logician before or since.").

A philosophy of logic, grounded in his categories and semiotic, can be extracted from Peirce's writings and, along with Peirce's logical work more generally, is exposited and defended in Hilary Putnam (1982);[72] the Introduction in Nathan Houser et al. (1997);[80] and Randall Dipert's chapter in Cheryl Misak (2004).[81]

Continua

Continuity and synechism are central in Peirce's philosophy: "I did not at first suppose that it was, as I gradually came to find it, the master-Key of philosophy".[82]

From a mathematical point of view, he embraced infinitesimals and worked long on the mathematics of continua. He long held that the real numbers constitute a pseudo-continuum;[83] that a true continuum is the real subject matter of analysis situs (topology); and that a true continuum of instants exceeds—and within any lapse of time has room for—any Aleph number (any infinite multitude as he called it) of instants.[84]

In 1908 Peirce wrote that he found that a true continuum might have or lack such room. Jérôme Havenel (2008): "It is on May 26, 1908, that Peirce finally gave up his idea that in every continuum there is room for whatever collection of any multitude. From now on, there are different kinds of continua, which have different properties."[85]

Probability and statistics

Peirce held that science achieves statistical probabilities, not certainties, and that spontaneity (absolute chance) is real (see Tychism on his view). Most of his statistical writings promote the frequency interpretation of probability (objective ratios of cases), and many of his writings express skepticism about (and criticize the use of) probability when such models are not based on objective randomization.[86] Though Peirce was largely a frequentist, his possible world semantics introduced the "propensity" theory of probability before Karl Popper.[87][88] Peirce (sometimes with Joseph Jastrow) investigated the probability judgments of experimental subjects, "perhaps the very first" elicitation and estimation of subjective probabilities in experimental psychology and (what came to be called) Bayesian statistics.[89]

Peirce was one of the founders of statistics. He formulated modern statistics in "Illustrations of the Logic of Science" (1877–8) and "A Theory of Probable Inference" (1883). With a repeated measures design, he introduced blinded, controlled randomized experiments in 1884 (Hacking 1990:205)[90] (before Ronald A. Fisher).[89] He invented optimal design for experiments on gravity, in which he "corrected the means". He used correlation and smoothing. Peirce extended the work on outliers by Benjamin Peirce, his father.[89] He introduced terms "confidence" and "likelihood" (before Jerzy Neyman and Fisher). (See Stephen Stigler's historical books and Ian Hacking 1990[90]).

Philosophy

31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.

Peirce was a working scientist for 30 years, and arguably was a professional philosopher only during the five years he lectured at Johns Hopkins. He learned philosophy mainly by reading, each day, a few pages of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, in the original German, while a Harvard undergraduate. His writings bear on a wide array of disciplines, including mathematics, logic, philosophy, statistics, astronomy,[17] metrology,[91] geodesy, experimental psychology,[92] economics,[93] linguistics,[94] and the history and philosophy of science. This work has enjoyed renewed interest and approval, a revival inspired not only by his anticipations of recent scientific developments but also by his demonstration of how philosophy can be applied effectively to human problems.

Peirce's philosophy includes (see below in related sections) a pervasive three-category system, belief that truth is immutable and is both independent from actual opinion (fallibilism) and discoverable (no radical skepticism), logic as formal semiotic on signs, on arguments, and on inquiry's ways—including philosophical pragmatism (which he founded), critical common-sensism, and scientific method—and, in metaphysics: Scholastic realism, belief in God, freedom, and at least an attenuated immortality, objective idealism, and belief in the reality of continuity and of absolute chance, mechanical necessity, and creative love. In his work, fallibilism and pragmatism may seem to work somewhat like skepticism and positivism, respectively, in others' work. However, for Peirce, fallibilism is balanced by an anti-skepticism and is a basis for belief in the reality of absolute chance and of continuity,[95] and pragmatism commits one to anti-nominalist belief in the reality of the general (CP 5.453–7).

For Peirce, First Philosophy, which he also called cenoscopy, is less basic than mathematics and more basic than the special sciences (of nature and mind). It studies positive phenomena in general, phenomena available to any person at any waking moment, and does not settle questions by resorting to special experiences.[96] He divided such philosophy into (1) phenomenology (which he also called phaneroscopy or categorics), (2) normative sciences (esthetics, ethics, and logic), and (3) metaphysics; his views on them are discussed in order below.

Theory of categories

Mining Engineer (Excluding Oil ) Truman from Alma, loves to spend time knotting, largest property developers in singapore developers in singapore and stamp collecting. Recently had a family visit to Urnes Stave Church.

On May 14, 1867, the 27-year-old Peirce presented a paper entitled "On a New List of Categories" to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, which published it the following year. The paper outlined a theory of predication, involving three universal categories that Peirce developed in response to reading Aristotle, Kant, and Hegel, categories that Peirce applied throughout his work for the rest of his life.[11] Peirce scholars generally regard the "New List" as foundational or breaking the ground for Peirce's "architectonic", his blueprint for a pragmatic philosophy. In the categories one will discern, concentrated, the pattern that one finds formed by the three grades of clearness in "How To Make Our Ideas Clear" (1878 paper foundational to pragmatism), and in numerous other trichotomies in his work.

"On a New List of Categories" is cast as a Kantian deduction; it is short but dense and difficult to summarize. The following table is compiled from that and later works.[97] In 1893, Peirce restated most of it for a less advanced audience.[98] Template:C. S. Peirce categorial table

Esthetics and ethics

Peirce did not write extensively in esthetics and ethics,[99] but came by 1902 to hold that esthetics, ethics, and logic, in that order, comprise the normative sciences.[100] He characterized esthetics as the study of the good (grasped as the admirable), and thus of the ends governing all conduct and thought.[101]

Philosophy: logic, or semiotic

Template:Semiotics

Logic as philosophical

Peirce regarded logic per se as a division of philosophy, as a normative science based on esthetics and ethics, as more basic than metaphysics,[102] and as "the art of devising methods of research".[103] More generally, as inference, "logic is rooted in the social principle", since inference depends on a standpoint that, in a sense, is unlimited.[104] Peirce called (with no sense of deprecation) "mathematics of logic" much of the kind of thing which, in current research and applications, is called simply "logic". He was productive in both (philosophical) logic and logic's mathematics, which were connected deeply in his work and thought.

Peirce argued that logic is formal semiotic, the formal study of signs in the broadest sense, not only signs that are artificial, linguistic, or symbolic, but also signs that are semblances or are indexical such as reactions. Peirce held that "all this universe is perfused with signs, if it is not composed exclusively of signs",[105] along with their representational and inferential relations. He argued that, since all thought takes time, all thought is in signs[106] and sign processes ("semiosis") such as the inquiry process. He divided logic into: (1) speculative grammar, or stechiology, on how signs can be meaningful and, in relation to that, what kinds of signs there are, how they combine, and how some embody or incorporate others; (2) logical critic, or logic proper, on the modes of inference; and (3) speculative or universal rhetoric, or methodeutic,[107] the philosophical theory of inquiry, including pragmatism.

Presuppositions of logic

In his "F.R.L." [First Rule of Logic] (1899), Peirce states that the first, and "in one sense, the sole", rule of reason is that, to learn, one needs to desire to learn and desire it without resting satisfied with that which one is inclined to think.[102] So, the first rule is, to wonder. Peirce proceeds to a critical theme in research practices and the shaping of theories:

...there follows one corollary which itself deserves to be inscribed upon every wall of the city of philosophy:
Do not block the way of inquiry.

Peirce adds, that method and economy are best in research but no outright sin inheres in trying any theory in the sense that the investigation via its trial adoption can proceed unimpeded and undiscouraged, and that "the one unpardonable offence" is a philosophical barricade against truth's advance, an offense to which "metaphysicians in all ages have shown themselves the most addicted". Peirce in many writings holds that logic precedes metaphysics (ontological, religious, and physical).

Peirce goes on to list four common barriers to inquiry: (1) Assertion of absolute certainty; (2) maintaining that something is absolutely unknowable; (3) maintaining that something is absolutely inexplicable because absolutely basic or ultimate; (4) holding that perfect exactitude is possible, especially such as to quite preclude unusual and anomalous phenomena. To refuse absolute theoretical certainty is the heart of fallibilism, which Peirce unfolds into refusals to set up any of the listed barriers. Peirce elsewhere argues (1897) that logic's presupposition of fallibilism leads at length to the view that chance and continuity are very real (tychism and synechism).[95]

The First Rule of Logic pertains to the mind's presuppositions in undertaking reason and logic, presuppositions, for instance, that truth and the real do not depend on yours or my opinion of them but do depend on representational relation and consist in the destined end in investigation taken far enough (see below). He describes such ideas as, collectively, hopes which, in particular cases, one is unable seriously to doubt.[108]

Four incapacities

The Journal of Speculative Philosophy series (1868–69), including
  • Questions concerning certain Faculties claimed for Man (1868)
  • Some Consequences of Four Incapacities (1868)
  • Grounds of Validity of the Laws of Logic:
    Further Consequences of Four Incapacities (1869)

In three articles in 1868–69,[106][109][110] Peirce rejected mere verbal or hyperbolic doubt and first or ultimate principles, and argued that we have (as he numbered them[109]):

  1. No power of introspection. All knowledge of the internal world comes by hypothetical reasoning from known external facts.
  2. No power of intuition (cognition without logical determination by previous cognitions). No cognitive stage is absolutely first in a process. All mental action has the form of inference.
  3. No power of thinking without signs. A cognition must be interpreted in a subsequent cognition in order to be a cognition at all.
  4. No conception of the absolutely incognizable.

(The above sense of the term "intuition" is almost Kant's, said Peirce. It differs from the current looser sense that encompasses instinctive or anyway half-conscious inference.)

Peirce argued that those incapacities imply the reality of the general and of the continuous, the validity of the modes of reasoning,[110] and the falsity of philosophical Cartesianism (see below).

Peirce rejected the conception (usually ascribed to Kant) of the unknowable thing-in-itself[109] and later said that to "dismiss make-believes" is a prerequisite for pragmatism.[111]

Logic as formal semiotic

Peirce sought, through his wide-ranging studies through the decades, formal philosophical ways to articulate thought's processes, and also to explain the workings of science. These inextricably entangled questions of a dynamics of inquiry rooted in nature and nurture led him to develop his semiotic with very broadened conceptions of signs and inference, and, as its culmination, a theory of inquiry for the task of saying 'how science works' and devising research methods. This would be logic by the medieval definition taught for centuries: art of arts, science of sciences, having the way to the principles of all methods.[103] Influences radiate from points on parallel lines of inquiry in Aristotle's work, in such loci as: the basic terminology of psychology in On the Soul; the founding description of sign relations in On Interpretation; and the differentiation of inference into three modes that are commonly translated into English as abduction, deduction, and induction, in the Prior Analytics, as well as inference by analogy (called paradeigma by Aristotle), which Peirce regarded as involving the other three modes.

Peirce began writing on semiotic in the 1860s, around the time when he devised his system of three categories. He called it both semiotic and semeiotic. Both are current in singular and plural. He based it on the conception of a triadic sign relation, and defined semiosis as "action, or influence, which is, or involves, a cooperation of three subjects, such as a sign, its object, and its interpretant, this tri-relative influence not being in any way resolvable into actions between pairs".[112] As to signs in thought, Peirce emphasized the reverse:

31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape. Peirce held that all thought is in signs, issuing in and from interpretation, where 'sign' is the word for the broadest variety of conceivable semblances, diagrams, metaphors, symptoms, signals, designations, symbols, texts, even mental concepts and ideas, all as determinations of a mind or quasi-mind, that which at least functions like a mind, as in the work of crystals or bees[113] — the focus is on sign action in general rather than on psychology, linguistics, or social studies (fields which he also pursued).

Inquiry is a kind of inference process, a manner of thinking and semiosis. Global divisions of ways for phenomena to stand as signs, and the subsumption of inquiry and thinking within inference as a sign process, enable the study of inquiry on semiotics' three levels:

  1. Conditions for meaningfulness. Study of significatory elements and combinations, their grammar.
  2. Validity, conditions for true representation. Critique of arguments in their various separate modes.
  3. Conditions for determining interpretations. Methodology of inquiry in its mutually interacting modes.

Peirce uses examples often from common experience, but defines and discusses such things as assertion and interpretation in terms of philosophical logic. In a formal vein, Peirce said:

31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.

Signs

Mining Engineer (Excluding Oil ) Truman from Alma, loves to spend time knotting, largest property developers in singapore developers in singapore and stamp collecting. Recently had a family visit to Urnes Stave Church. DTZ's public sale group in Singapore auctions all forms of residential, workplace and retail properties, outlets, homes, lodges, boarding homes, industrial buildings and development websites. Auctions are at present held as soon as a month.

We will not only get you a property at a rock-backside price but also in an space that you've got longed for. You simply must chill out back after giving us the accountability. We will assure you 100% satisfaction. Since we now have been working in the Singapore actual property market for a very long time, we know the place you may get the best property at the right price. You will also be extremely benefited by choosing us, as we may even let you know about the precise time to invest in the Singapore actual property market.

The Hexacube is offering new ec launch singapore business property for sale Singapore investors want to contemplate. Residents of the realm will likely appreciate that they'll customize the business area that they wish to purchase as properly. This venture represents one of the crucial expansive buildings offered in Singapore up to now. Many investors will possible want to try how they will customise the property that they do determine to buy by means of here. This location has offered folks the prospect that they should understand extra about how this course of can work as well.

Singapore has been beckoning to traders ever since the value of properties in Singapore started sky rocketing just a few years again. Many businesses have their places of work in Singapore and prefer to own their own workplace area within the country once they decide to have a everlasting office. Rentals in Singapore in the corporate sector can make sense for some time until a business has discovered a agency footing. Finding Commercial Property Singapore takes a variety of time and effort but might be very rewarding in the long term.

is changing into a rising pattern among Singaporeans as the standard of living is increasing over time and more Singaporeans have abundance of capital to invest on properties. Investing in the personal properties in Singapore I would like to applaud you for arising with such a book which covers the secrets and techniques and tips of among the profitable Singapore property buyers. I believe many novice investors will profit quite a bit from studying and making use of some of the tips shared by the gurus." – Woo Chee Hoe Special bonus for consumers of Secrets of Singapore Property Gurus Actually, I can't consider one other resource on the market that teaches you all the points above about Singapore property at such a low value. Can you? Condominium For Sale (D09) – Yong An Park For Lease

In 12 months 2013, c ommercial retails, shoebox residences and mass market properties continued to be the celebrities of the property market. Models are snapped up in report time and at document breaking prices. Builders are having fun with overwhelming demand and patrons need more. We feel that these segments of the property market are booming is a repercussion of the property cooling measures no.6 and no. 7. With additional buyer's stamp responsibility imposed on residential properties, buyers change their focus to commercial and industrial properties. I imagine every property purchasers need their property funding to understand in value. A list of noted writings by Peirce on signs and sign relations is at Semiotic elements and classes of signs (Peirce)#References and further reading.

Sign relation

Anything is a sign — not absolutely as itself, but instead in some relation or other. The sign relation is the key. It defines three roles encompassing (1) the sign, (2) the sign's subject matter, called its object, and (3) the sign's meaning or ramification as formed into a kind of effect called its interpretant (a further sign, for example a translation). It is an irreducible triadic relation, according to Peirce. The roles are distinct even when the things that fill those roles are not. The roles are but three; a sign of an object leads to one or more interpretants, and, as signs, they lead to further interpretants.

Extension × intension = information. Two traditional approaches to sign relation, necessary though insufficient, are the way of extension (a sign's objects, also called breadth, denotation, or application) and the way of intension (the objects' characteristics, qualities, attributes referenced by the sign, also called depth, comprehension, significance, or connotation). Peirce adds a third, the way of information, including change of information, to integrate the other two approaches into a unified whole.[114] For example, because of the equation above, if a term's total amount of information stays the same, then the more that the term 'intends' or signifies about objects, the fewer are the objects to which the term 'extends' or applies.

Determination. A sign depends on its object in such a way as to represent its object — the object enables and, in a sense, determines the sign. A physically causal sense of this stands out when a sign consists in an indicative reaction. The interpretant depends likewise on both the sign and the object — an object determines a sign to determine an interpretant. But this determination is not a succession of dyadic events, like a row of toppling dominoes; sign determination is triadic. For example, an interpretant does not merely represent something which represented an object; instead an interpretant represents something as a sign representing the object. The object (be it a quality or fact or law or even fictional) determines the sign to an interpretant through one's collateral experience[115] with the object, in which the object is found or from which it is recalled, as when a sign consists in a chance semblance of an absent object. Peirce used the word "determine" not in a strictly deterministic sense, but in a sense of "specializes," bestimmt,[116] involving variable amount, like an influence.[117] Peirce came to define representation and interpretation in terms of (triadic) determination.[118] The object determines the sign to determine another sign — the interpretant — to be related to the object as the sign is related to the object, hence the interpretant, fulfilling its function as sign of the object, determines a further interpretant sign. The process is logically structured to perpetuate itself, and is definitive of sign, object, and interpretant in general.[117]

Semiotic elements

Peirce held there are exactly three basic elements in semiosis (sign action):

  1. A sign (or representamen)[119] represents, in the broadest possible sense of "represents". It is something interpretable as saying something about something. It is not necessarily symbolic, linguistic, or artificial—a cloud might be a sign of rain for instance, or ruins the sign of ancient civilization.[120] As Peirce sometimes put it (he defined sign at least 76 times[117]), the sign stands for the object to the interpretant. A sign represents its object in some respect, which respect is the sign's ground.[121]
  2. An object (or semiotic object) is a subject matter of a sign and an interpretant. It can be anything thinkable, a quality, an occurrence, a rule, etc., even fictional, such as Prince Hamlet.[122] All of those are special or partial objects. The object most accurately is the universe of discourse to which the partial or special object belongs.[122] For instance, a perturbation of Pluto's orbit is a sign about Pluto but ultimately not only about Pluto. An object either (i) is immediate to a sign and is the object as represented in the sign or (ii) is a dynamic object, the object as it really is, on which the immediate object is founded "as on bedrock".[123]
  3. An interpretant (or interpretant sign) is a sign's meaning or ramification as formed into a kind of idea or effect, an interpretation, human or otherwise. An interpretant is a sign (a) of the object and (b) of the interpretant's "predecessor" (the interpreted sign) as a sign of the same object. An interpretant either (i) is immediate to a sign and is a kind of quality or possibility such as a word's usual meaning, or (ii) is a dynamic interpretant, such as a state of agitation, or (iii) is a final or normal interpretant, a sum of the lessons which a sufficiently considered sign would have as effects on practice, and with which an actual interpretant may at most coincide.

Some of the understanding needed by the mind depends on familiarity with the object. To know what a given sign denotes, the mind needs some experience of that sign's object, experience outside of, and collateral to, that sign or sign system. In that context Peirce speaks of collateral experience, collateral observation, collateral acquaintance, all in much the same terms.[115]

Classes of signs

Among Peirce's many sign typologies, three stand out, interlocked. The first typology depends on the sign itself, the second on how the sign stands for its denoted object, and the third on how the sign stands for its object to its interpretant. Also, each of the three typologies is a three-way division, a trichotomy, via Peirce's three phenomenological categories: (1) quality of feeling, (2) reaction, resistance, and (3) representation, mediation.[124]

I. Qualisign, sinsign, legisign (also called tone, token, type, and also called potisign, actisign, famisign):[125] This typology classifies every sign according to the sign's own phenomenological category—the qualisign is a quality, a possibility, a "First"; the sinsign is a reaction or resistance, a singular object, an actual event or fact, a "Second"; and the legisign is a habit, a rule, a representational relation, a "Third".

II. Icon, index, symbol: This typology, the best known one, classifies every sign according to the category of the sign's way of denoting its object—the icon (also called semblance or likeness) by a quality of its own, the index by factual connection to its object, and the symbol by a habit or rule for its interpretant.

III. Rheme, dicisign, argument (also called sumisign, dicisign, suadisign, also seme, pheme, delome,[125] and regarded as very broadened versions of the traditional term, proposition, argument): This typology classifies every sign according to the category which the interpretant attributes to the sign's way of denoting its object—the rheme, for example a term, is a sign interpreted to represent its object in respect of quality; the dicisign, for example a proposition, is a sign interpreted to represent its object in respect of fact; and the argument is a sign interpreted to represent its object in respect of habit or law. This is the culminating typology of the three, where the sign is understood as a structural element of inference. Template:C. S. Peirce ninefold sign table Every sign belongs to one class or another within (I) and within (II) and within (III). Thus each of the three typologies is a three-valued parameter for every sign. The three parameters are not independent of each other; many co-classifications are absent, for reasons pertaining to the lack of either habit-taking or singular reaction in a quality, and the lack of habit-taking in a singular reaction. The result is not 27 but instead ten classes of signs fully specified at this level of analysis.

Modes of inference

Mining Engineer (Excluding Oil ) Truman from Alma, loves to spend time knotting, largest property developers in singapore developers in singapore and stamp collecting. Recently had a family visit to Urnes Stave Church. Borrowing a brace of concepts from Aristotle, Peirce examined three basic modes of inferenceabduction, deduction, and induction — in his "critique of arguments" or "logic proper". Peirce also called abduction "retroduction", "presumption", and, earliest of all, "hypothesis". He characterized it as guessing and as inference to an explanatory hypothesis. He sometimes expounded the modes of inference by transformations of the categorical syllogism Barbara (AAA), for example in "Deduction, Induction, and Hypothesis" (1878).[126] He does this by rearranging the rule (Barbara's major premiss), the case (Barbara's minor premiss), and the result (Barbara's conclusion):

Template:Col-begin Template:Col-break Deduction.

Rule: All the beans from this bag are white.
Case: These beans are from this bag.
Result: These beans are white. Template:Col-break Template:Col-break Induction.

Case: These beans are [randomly selected] from this bag.
Result: These beans are white.
Rule: All the beans from this bag are white. Template:Col-break Template:Col-break Hypothesis (Abduction).

Rule: All the beans from this bag are white.
Result: These beans [oddly] are white.
Case: These beans are from this bag. Template:Col-end

Peirce 1883 in "A Theory of Probable Inference" (Studies in Logic) equated hypothetical inference with the induction of characters of objects (as he had done in effect before[109]). Eventually dissatisfied, by 1900 he distinguished them once and for all and also wrote that he now took the syllogistic forms and the doctrine of logical extension and comprehension as being less basic than he had thought. In 1903 he presented the following logical form for abductive inference:[127] 31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape. The logical form does not also cover induction, since induction neither depends on surprise nor proposes a new idea for its conclusion. Induction seeks facts to test a hypothesis; abduction seeks a hypothesis to account for facts. "Deduction proves that something must be; Induction shows that something actually is operative; Abduction merely suggests that something may be."[128] Peirce did not remain quite convinced that one logical form covers all abduction.[129] In his methodeutic or theory of inquiry (see below), he portrayed abduction as an economic initiative to further inference and study, and portrayed all three modes as clarified by their coordination in essential roles in inquiry: hypothetical explanation, deductive prediction, inductive testing.

Pragmatism

Mining Engineer (Excluding Oil ) Truman from Alma, loves to spend time knotting, largest property developers in singapore developers in singapore and stamp collecting. Recently had a family visit to Urnes Stave Church.

Some noted articles and lectures
  1. The Fixation of Belief (1877)
  2. How to Make Our Ideas Clear (1878)
  3. The Doctrine of Chances (1878)
  4. The Probability of Induction (1878)
  5. The Order of Nature (1878)
  6. Deduction, Induction, and Hypothesis (1878)
  • The Harvard lectures on pragmatism (1903)
  • What Pragmatism Is (1905)
  • Issues of Pragmaticism (1905)
  • Pragmatism (1907 MS in EP 2)

Peirce's recipe for pragmatic thinking, which he called pragmatism and, later, pragmaticism, is recapitulated in several versions of the so-called pragmatic maxim. Here is one of his more emphatic reiterations of it:

31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.

As a movement, pragmatism began in the early 1870s in discussions among Peirce, William James, and others in the Metaphysical Club. James among others regarded some articles by Peirce such as "The Fixation of Belief" (1877) and especially "How to Make Our Ideas Clear" (1878) as foundational to pragmatism.[130] Peirce (CP 5.11–12), like James (Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking, 1907), saw pragmatism as embodying familiar attitudes, in philosophy and elsewhere, elaborated into a new deliberate method for fruitful thinking about problems. Peirce differed from James and the early John Dewey, in some of their tangential enthusiasms, in being decidedly more rationalistic and realistic, in several senses of those terms, throughout the preponderance of his own philosophical moods.

In 1905 Peirce coined the new name pragmaticism "for the precise purpose of expressing the original definition", saying that "all went happily" with James's and F.C.S. Schiller's variant uses of the old name "pragmatism" and that he coined the new name because of the old name's growing use in "literary journals, where it gets abused". Yet he cited as causes, in a 1906 manuscript, his differences with James and Schiller and, in a 1908 publication, his differences with James as well as literary author Giovanni Papini's declaration of pragmatism's indefinability. Peirce in any case regarded his views that truth is immutable and infinity is real, as being opposed by the other pragmatists, but he remained allied with them on other issues.[131]

Pragmatism begins with the idea that belief is that on which one is prepared to act. Peirce's pragmatism is a method of clarification of conceptions of objects. It equates any conception of an object to a conception of that object's effects to a general extent of the effects' conceivable implications for informed practice. It is a method of sorting out conceptual confusions occasioned, for example, by distinctions that make (sometimes needed) formal yet not practical differences. He formulated both pragmatism and statistical principles as aspects of scientific logic, in his "Illustrations of the Logic of Science" series of articles. In the second one, "How to Make Our Ideas Clear", Peirce discussed three grades of clearness of conception:

  1. Clearness of a conception familiar and readily used, even if unanalyzed and undeveloped.
  2. Clearness of a conception in virtue of clearness of its parts, in virtue of which logicians called an idea "distinct", that is, clarified by analysis of just what makes it applicable. Elsewhere, echoing Kant, Peirce called a likewise distinct definition "nominal" (CP 5.553).
  3. Clearness in virtue of clearness of conceivable practical implications of the object's conceived effects, such as fosters fruitful reasoning, especially on difficult problems. Here he introduced that which he later called the pragmatic maxim.

By way of example of how to clarify conceptions, he addressed conceptions about truth and the real as questions of the presuppositions of reasoning in general. In clearness's second grade (the "nominal" grade), he defined truth as a sign's correspondence to its object, and the real as the object of such correspondence, such that truth and the real are independent of that which you or I or any actual, definite community of inquirers think. After that needful but confined step, next in clearness's third grade (the pragmatic, practice-oriented grade) he defined truth as that opinion which would be reached, sooner or later but still inevitably, by research taken far enough, such that the real does depend on that ideal final opinion—a dependence to which he appeals in theoretical arguments elsewhere, for instance for the long-run validity of the rule of induction.[132] Peirce argued that even to argue against the independence and discoverability of truth and the real is to presuppose that there is, about that very question under argument, a truth with just such independence and discoverability.

Peirce said that a conception's meaning consists in "all general modes of rational conduct" implied by "acceptance" of the conception—that is, if one were to accept, first of all, the conception as true, then what could one conceive to be consequent general modes of rational conduct by all who accept the conception as true?—the whole of such consequent general modes is the whole meaning. His pragmatism does not equate a conception's meaning, its intellectual purport, with the conceived benefit or cost of the conception itself, like a meme (or, say, propaganda), outside the perspective of its being true, nor, since a conception is general, is its meaning equated with any definite set of actual consequences or upshots corroborating or undermining the conception or its worth. His pragmatism also bears no resemblance to "vulgar" pragmatism, which misleadingly connotes a ruthless and Machiavellian search for mercenary or political advantage. Instead the pragmatic maxim is the heart of his pragmatism as a method of experimentational mental reflection[133] arriving at conceptions in terms of conceivable confirmatory and disconfirmatory circumstances—a method hospitable to the formation of explanatory hypotheses, and conducive to the use and improvement of verification.[134]

Peirce's pragmatism, as method and theory of definitions and conceptual clearness, is part of his theory of inquiry,[135] which he variously called speculative, general, formal or universal rhetoric or simply methodeutic.[107] He applied his pragmatism as a method throughout his work.

Theory of inquiry

DTZ's public sale group in Singapore auctions all forms of residential, workplace and retail properties, outlets, homes, lodges, boarding homes, industrial buildings and development websites. Auctions are at present held as soon as a month.

We will not only get you a property at a rock-backside price but also in an space that you've got longed for. You simply must chill out back after giving us the accountability. We will assure you 100% satisfaction. Since we now have been working in the Singapore actual property market for a very long time, we know the place you may get the best property at the right price. You will also be extremely benefited by choosing us, as we may even let you know about the precise time to invest in the Singapore actual property market.

The Hexacube is offering new ec launch singapore business property for sale Singapore investors want to contemplate. Residents of the realm will likely appreciate that they'll customize the business area that they wish to purchase as properly. This venture represents one of the crucial expansive buildings offered in Singapore up to now. Many investors will possible want to try how they will customise the property that they do determine to buy by means of here. This location has offered folks the prospect that they should understand extra about how this course of can work as well.

Singapore has been beckoning to traders ever since the value of properties in Singapore started sky rocketing just a few years again. Many businesses have their places of work in Singapore and prefer to own their own workplace area within the country once they decide to have a everlasting office. Rentals in Singapore in the corporate sector can make sense for some time until a business has discovered a agency footing. Finding Commercial Property Singapore takes a variety of time and effort but might be very rewarding in the long term.

is changing into a rising pattern among Singaporeans as the standard of living is increasing over time and more Singaporeans have abundance of capital to invest on properties. Investing in the personal properties in Singapore I would like to applaud you for arising with such a book which covers the secrets and techniques and tips of among the profitable Singapore property buyers. I believe many novice investors will profit quite a bit from studying and making use of some of the tips shared by the gurus." – Woo Chee Hoe Special bonus for consumers of Secrets of Singapore Property Gurus Actually, I can't consider one other resource on the market that teaches you all the points above about Singapore property at such a low value. Can you? Condominium For Sale (D09) – Yong An Park For Lease

In 12 months 2013, c ommercial retails, shoebox residences and mass market properties continued to be the celebrities of the property market. Models are snapped up in report time and at document breaking prices. Builders are having fun with overwhelming demand and patrons need more. We feel that these segments of the property market are booming is a repercussion of the property cooling measures no.6 and no. 7. With additional buyer's stamp responsibility imposed on residential properties, buyers change their focus to commercial and industrial properties. I imagine every property purchasers need their property funding to understand in value.

Critical common-sensism

Critical common-sensism,[136] treated by Peirce as a consequence of his pragmatism, is his combination of Thomas Reid's common-sense philosophy with a fallibilism that recognizes that propositions of our more or less vague common sense now indubitable may later come into actual question, for example because of science's transformation of our world. It includes efforts to work up genuine doubts in tests for a core group of common indubitables that varies slowly if at all.

Rival methods of inquiry

In The Fixation of Belief (1877), Peirce described inquiry in general not as the pursuit of truth per se but as the struggle to move from irritating, inhibitory doubt born of surprise, disagreement, and the like, and to reach a secure belief, belief being that on which one is prepared to act. That let Peirce frame scientific inquiry as part of a broader spectrum and as spurred, like inquiry generally, by actual doubt, not mere verbal, quarrelsome, or hyperbolic doubt, which he held to be fruitless. Peirce sketched four methods of settling opinion, ordered from least to most successful:

  1. The method of tenacity (policy of sticking to initial belief) — which brings comforts and decisiveness but leads to trying to ignore contrary information and others' views as if truth were intrinsically private, not public. The method goes against the social impulse and easily falters since one may well notice when another's opinion seems as good as one's own initial opinion. Its successes can be brilliant but tend to be transitory.
  2. The method of authority — which overcomes disagreements but sometimes brutally. Its successes can be majestic and long-lasting, but it cannot regulate people thoroughly enough to withstand doubts indefinitely, especially when people learn about other societies present and past.
  3. The method of the a priori — which promotes conformity less brutally but fosters opinions as something like tastes, arising in conversation and comparisons of perspectives in terms of "what is agreeable to reason." Thereby it depends on fashion in paradigms and goes in circles over time. It is more intellectual and respectable but, like the first two methods, sustains accidental and capricious beliefs, destining some minds to doubt it.
  4. The method of science — wherein inquiry supposes that the real is discoverable but independent of particular opinion, such that, unlike in the other methods, inquiry can, by its own account, go wrong (fallibilism), not only right, and thus purposely tests itself and criticizes, corrects, and improves itself.

Peirce held that, in practical affairs, slow and stumbling ratiocination is often dangerously inferior to instinct and traditional sentiment, and that the scientific method is best suited to theoretical research,[137] which in turn should not be trammeled by the other methods and practical ends; reason's "first rule"[102] is that, in order to learn, one must desire to learn and, as a corollary, must not block the way of inquiry. Scientific method excels the others finally by being deliberately designed to arrive — eventually — at the most secure beliefs, upon which the most successful practices can be based. Starting from the idea that people seek not truth per se but instead to subdue irritating, inhibitory doubt, Peirce showed how, through the struggle, some can come to submit to truth for the sake of belief's integrity, seek as truth the guidance of potential conduct correctly to its given goal, and wed themselves to the scientific method.

Scientific method

Insofar as clarification by pragmatic reflection suits explanatory hypotheses and fosters predictions and testing, pragmatism points beyond the usual duo of foundational alternatives: deduction from self-evident truths, or rationalism; and induction from experiential phenomena, or empiricism.

Peirce's approach, based in his critique of three modes of argument, differs from approaches based in either foundationalism or coherentism about justification of claims, by a three-phase dynamic of inquiry:

  1. Active, abductive genesis of theory, with no prior assurance of truth;
  2. Deductive application of the contingent theory so as to clarify its practical implications;
  3. Inductive testing and evaluation of the provisional theory's utility for the anticipation of future experience, in both senses: prediction and control.

Thereby he fleshed out an approach to inquiry far more solid than the flatter image of inductive generalization simpliciter, which is a mere relabeling of phenomenological patterns. Peirce's pragmatism was the first time the scientific method was proposed as an epistemology for philosophical questions.

A theory that succeeds better than its rivals in predicting and controlling our world is said to be nearer the truth. This is an operational notion of truth used by scientists.

Peirce extracted the pragmatic model or theory of inquiry from its raw materials in classical logic and refined it in parallel with the early development of symbolic logic to address problems about the nature of scientific reasoning.

Abduction, deduction, and induction make incomplete sense in isolation from one another but comprise a cycle understandable as a whole insofar as they collaborate toward inquiry's end. In the pragmatic way of thinking in terms of conceivable practical implications, every thing has a purpose, and its purpose is the first thing that we should try to note about it. Abduction hypothesizes an explanation for deduction to clarify into implications to be tested so that induction can evaluate the hypothesis, in the struggle to move from troublesome uncertainty to secure belief. No matter how traditional and needful it is to study the modes of inference in abstraction from one another, inquiry's integrity strongly limits the effective modularity of inquiry's principal components.

Peirce's outline of the scientific method in §III–IV of "A Neglected Argument"[138] is summarized below (except as otherwise noted). There he also reviewed plausibility and inductive precision (issues of critique of arguments).

1. Abductive (or retroductive) phase. Guessing, inference to explanatory hypotheses for selection of those best worth trying. From abduction, Peirce distinguishes induction as inferring, on the basis of tests, the proportion of truth in the hypothesis. Every inquiry, whether into ideas, brute facts, or norms and laws, arises from surprising observations in one or more of those realms (and for example at any stage of an inquiry already underway). All explanatory content of theories comes from abduction, which guesses a new or outside idea so as to account in a simple, economical way for a surprising or complicated phenomenon. Oftenest even a well-prepared mind guesses wrong. But the modicum of success of our guesses far exceeds that of random luck, and seems born of attunement to nature by instincts developed or inherent, especially insofar as best guesses are optimally plausible and simple in the sense of the "facile and natural", as by Galileo's natural light of reason and as distinct from "logical simplicity".[139] Abduction is the most fertile but least secure mode of inference. Its general rationale is inductive: it succeeds often enough and it has no substitute in expediting us toward new truths.[140] In 1903 Peirce called pragmatism "the logic of abduction".[141] It points to efficiency. Coordinative method leads from abducing a plausible hypothesis to judging it for its testability[142] and for how its trial would economize inquiry itself.[143] The hypothesis, being insecure, needs to have practical implications leading at least to mental tests and, in science, lending themselves to scientific tests. A simple but unlikely guess, if uncostly to test for falsity, may belong first in line for testing. A guess is intrinsically worth testing if it has instinctive plausibility or reasoned objective probability, while subjective likelihood, though reasoned, can be misleadingly seductive. Guesses can be chosen for trial strategically, for their caution (for which Peirce gave as example the game of Twenty Questions), breadth, or incomplexity.[144] One can hope to discover only that which time would reveal through a learner's sufficient experience anyway, so the point is to expedite it; economy of research is what demands the leap, so to speak, of abduction and governs its art.[143]

2. Deductive phase. Two stages:

i. Explication. Unclearly premissed, but deductive, analysis of the hypothesis so as to render its parts as clear as possible.
ii. Demonstration: Deductive Argumentation, Euclidean in procedure. Explicit deduction of hypothesis's consequences as predictions about evidence to be found. Corollarial or, if needed, Theorematic.

3. Inductive phase. Evaluation of the hypothesis, inferring from observational or experimental tests of its deduced consequences. The long-run validity of the rule of induction is deducible from the principle (presuppositional to reasoning in general) that the real "is only the object of the final opinion to which sufficient investigation would lead";[132] anything to which no such process would ever lead would not be real. Induction involving the ongoing accumulation of evidence follows "a method which, sufficiently persisted in," will "diminish the error below any predesignate degree." Three stages:

i. Classification. Unclearly premissed, but inductive, classing of objects of experience under general ideas.
ii. Probation: direct Inductive Argumentation. Crude or Gradual. Crude Induction, founded on experience in one mass (CP 2.759), presumes that future experience on a question will not differ utterly from all past experience (CP 2.756). Gradual Induction makes a new estimate of the proportion of truth in the hypothesis after each test, and is Qualitative or Quantitative. Qualitative Induction depends on estimating the relative evidential weights of the various qualities of the subject class under investigation (CP 2.759; see also CP 7.114–20). Quantitative Induction depends on how often, in a fair sample of instances of S, S is found actually accompanied by P that was predicted for S (CP 2.758). It depends on measurements, or statistics, or counting.
iii. Sentential Induction. "...which, by Inductive reasonings, appraises the different Probations singly, then their combinations, then makes self-appraisal of these very appraisals themselves, and passes final judgment on the whole result".
Against Cartesianism

Peirce drew on the methodological implications of the four incapacities — no genuine introspection, no intuition in the sense of non-inferential cognition, no thought but in signs, and no conception of the absolutely incognizable — to attack philosophical Cartesianism, of which he said that:[109]

1. "It teaches that philosophy must begin in universal doubt" — when, instead, we start with preconceptions, "prejudices [...] which it does not occur to us can be questioned", though we may find reason to question them later. "Let us not pretend to doubt in philosophy what we do not doubt in our hearts."

2. "It teaches that the ultimate test of certainty is...in the individual consciousness" — when, instead, in science a theory stays on probation till agreement is reached, then it has no actual doubters left. No lone individual can reasonably hope to fulfill philosophy's multi-generational dream. When "candid and disciplined minds" continue to disagree on a theoretical issue, even the theory's author should feel doubts about it.

3. It trusts to "a single thread of inference depending often upon inconspicuous premisses" — when, instead, philosophy should, "like the successful sciences", proceed only from tangible, scrutinizable premisses and trust not to any one argument but instead to "the multitude and variety of its arguments" as forming, not a chain at least as weak as its weakest link, but "a cable whose fibers", soever "slender, are sufficiently numerous and intimately connected".

4. It renders many facts "absolutely inexplicable, unless to say that 'God makes them so' is to be regarded as an explanation"[145] — when, instead, philosophy should avoid being "unidealistic",[146] misbelieving that something real can defy or evade all possible ideas, and supposing, inevitably, "some absolutely inexplicable, unanalyzable ultimate", which explanatory surmise explains nothing and so is inadmissible.

Philosophy: metaphysics

Some noted articles
  • The Monist Metaphysical Series (1891–93)
    • The Architecture of Theories (1891)
    • The Doctrine of Necessity Examined (1892)
    • The Law of Mind (1892)
    • Man's Glassy Essence (1892)
    • Evolutionary Love (1893)
  • Immortality in the Light of Synechism (1893 MS)

Peirce divided metaphysics into (1) ontology or general metaphysics, (2) psychical or religious metaphysics, and (3) physical metaphysics.

Ontology. Peirce was a Scholastic Realist, declaring for the reality of generals as early as 1868.[147] Regarding modalities (possibility, necessity, etc.), he came in later years to regard himself as having wavered earlier as to just how positively real the modalities are. In his 1897 "The Logic of Relatives" he wrote: 31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape. Peirce retained, as useful for some purposes, the definitions in terms of information states, but insisted that the pragmaticist is committed to a strong modal realism by conceiving of objects in terms of predictive general conditional propositions about how they would behave under certain circumstances.[148]

Psychical or Religious Metaphysics. Peirce believed in God, and characterized such belief as founded in an instinct explorable in musing over the worlds of ideas, brute facts, and evolving habits — and it is a belief in God not as an actual or existent being (in Peirce's sense of those words), but all the same as a real being.[149] In "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God" (1908),[138] Peirce sketches, for God's reality, an argument to a hypothesis of God as the Necessary Being, a hypothesis which he describes in terms of how it would tend to develop and become compelling in musement and inquiry by a normal person who is led, by the hypothesis, to consider as being purposed the features of the worlds of ideas, brute facts, and evolving habits (for example scientific progress), such that the thought of such purposefulness will "stand or fall with the hypothesis"; meanwhile, according to Peirce, the hypothesis, in supposing an "infinitely incomprehensible" being, starts off at odds with its own nature as a purportively true conception, and so, no matter how much the hypothesis grows, it both (A) inevitably regards itself as partly true, partly vague, and as continuing to define itself without limit, and (B) inevitably has God appearing likewise vague but growing, though God as the Necessary Being is not vague or growing; but the hypothesis will hold it to be more false to say the opposite, that God is purposeless. Peirce also argued that the will is free[150] and (see Synechism) that there is at least an attenuated kind of immortality.

Physical Metaphysics. Peirce held the view, which he called objective idealism, that "matter is effete mind, inveterate habits becoming physical laws".[151] Peirce asserted the reality of (1) absolute chance (his tychist view), (2) mechanical necessity (anancist view), and (3) that which he called the law of love (agapist view), echoing his categories Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness, respectively. He held that fortuitous variation (which he also called "sporting"), mechanical necessity, and creative love are the three modes of evolution (modes called "tychasm", "anancasm", and "agapasm")[152] of the cosmos and its parts. He found his conception of agapasm embodied in Lamarckian evolution; the overall idea in any case is that of evolution tending toward an end or goal, and it could also be the evolution of a mind or a society; it is the kind of evolution which manifests workings of mind in some general sense. He said that overall he was a synechist, holding with reality of continuity,[153] especially of space, time, and law.[154]

Science of review

Mining Engineer (Excluding Oil ) Truman from Alma, loves to spend time knotting, largest property developers in singapore developers in singapore and stamp collecting. Recently had a family visit to Urnes Stave Church. Peirce outlined two fields, "Cenoscopy" and "Science of Review", both of which he called philosophy. Both included philosophy about science. In 1903 he arranged them, from more to less theoretically basic, thus:[96]

  1. Science of Discovery.
    1. Mathematics.
    2. Cenoscopy (philosophy as discussed earlier in this article—categorial, normative, metaphysical), as First Philosophy, concerns positive phenomena in general, does not rely on findings from special sciences, and includes the general study of inquiry and scientific method.
    3. Idioscopy, or the Special Sciences (of nature and mind).
  2. Science of Review, as Ultimate Philosophy, arranges "...the results of discovery, beginning with digests, and going on to endeavor to form a philosophy of science". His examples included Humboldt's Cosmos, Comte's Philosophie positive, and Spencer's Synthetic Philosophy.
  3. Practical Science, or the Arts.

Peirce placed, within Science of Review, the work and theory of classifying the sciences (including mathematics and philosophy). His classifications, on which he worked for many years, draw on argument and wide knowledge, and are of interest both as a map for navigating his philosophy and as an accomplished polymath's survey of research in his time.

See also

Template:Col-begin Template:Col-break

Template:Col-break

Template:Col-break

Template:Col-break

Template:Col-end

Contemporaries associated with Peirce Template:Col-begin Template:Col-break

Template:Col-break

Template:Col-break

Template:Col-end

Notes

43 year old Petroleum Engineer Harry from Deep River, usually spends time with hobbies and interests like renting movies, property developers in singapore new condominium and vehicle racing. Constantly enjoys going to destinations like Camino Real de Tierra Adentro.

External links

Singapore has elevated a tax on foreign property buyers as part of new non permanent measures to chill its residential housing market which has seen continued strong demand regardless of previous efforts to curb prices.

This doc has been ready by All Property Solutions Singapore Pte Ltd. The information including all materials, estimates, calculations, opinions or suggestions contained in this doc have been provided in good faith and have been primarily based on info received from sources All Property Solutions Singapore Pte Ltd has accepted in good faith. No guarantee is made as to the accuracy or reliability of any info contained on this document and neither All Property Options Singapore Pte Ltd nor any individuals involved within the preparation of this doc settle for any form of legal responsibility for its content material.

Rare Industrial Development within Pandan Food Zone area up for sale A home mortgage or mortgage loan is a mortgage to purchase property and secured on the property that you purchase. A house loan is usually repayable in monthly instalments. Earlier than taking over a house mortgage, just remember to can afford the repayments. Do ask for a repayment schedule to help you estimate costs. Starting from March 2012, your bank also needs to give you a residential property mortgage fact sheet to help you perceive the terms of the mortgage. The Topiary EC @ Fernvale any unit in an authorised condominium improvement under the Planning Act; and Approval must be obtained from the Minister for Regulation to buy a restricted residential property. GETTING YOUR PROPERTY SOLD / LEASED? SLA website

Previous rounds of Government measures have had a moderating effect on residential property costs. There is additionally vital provide of housing that may come onto the market over the next two years. Nonetheless, prices in both the HDB resale market and personal residential property have continued to rise in Q2 and Q3 of 2012. Lease Property District 06 Hire Property District 07 Rent Property District 08 Hire Property District 09 Hire Property District 22 Lease Property District 26 Lease Property District 27 JLL appointed unique agent for the sale of 2, 4 and 6 Dunlop Avenue by Expression of Curiosity. Freehold improvement within the prestigious Ardmore Park / Claymore district with potential for en bloc sale Forestville EC @ Woodlands An EC with Iconic Skypark! Home Viewing

Mortgages might be obtained for buy of all freehold properties and some leasehold properties relying upon the utilization and the unexpired lease term. New leasehold residential properties which typically come with ninety nine years leasehold shouldn't be a problem. Banks could also be unwilling to provide loans for residential properties with lower than 60 years unexpired lease. Condominiums are a preferred choice with both expatriates and locals. The huge vary of amenities, from swimming pool and fitness center to round the clock security and scenic surroundings, provide for a snug lifestyle, especially for families. For a listing of condominiums, click on right here Sign an inventory listing of all of the items offered by the owner, together with their condition. Housing mortgage repayments

In case you're searching for a new launching property dwelling or selling one, now you can negotiate together with your property agent on the suitable fee. The Institute of Estate Brokers (IEA) will take away its guidelines on property brokers' commissions subsequent month, to fall according to the Competition Act. In line with latest official figures, there has additionally been little upward movement within the non-public property rental market. Rent House District 05 Rent Home District 06 Hire House District 07 Hire Home District 08 Rent House District 09 Hire House District 10 Lease Home District eleven Hire Home District 12 Hire Home District thirteen Hire House District 14 Hire Home District 15 Hire House District 16 Rent Home District 18 Lease Home District 20 Lease Home District 21 Rent Home District 22 Lease House District 23 Hire House District 24

Equally, jojoba oil is helpful for eradicating eye makeup like kohl, liner, mascara and eyeshadow. The most effective part is this oil does not cause any eye irritation. Since the eye area may be very sensitive, you just have to use the oil with nice care and be sure to do not rub it harshly. Simply, dip a cotton pad into the oil and apply instantly over the eyelashes. Within no time, you can see that it has removed all the make-up. Common software will make the lashes extra stunning. Charles Sanders Peirce bibliography has external links throughout to such materials as biographical and overview articles on Peirce at encyclopedias, study sites, etc.; individual works by Peirce; and collections, bibliographies, and Peirce's definitions in the Baldwin dictionary.

Other useful sets of links:

Peirce sites

Template:Refbegin Template:C. S. Peirce external links Template:Refend

Template:Logic Template:Statistics Template:Philosophy of science Template:Metaphysics

In the event you've just lately been requested by your employer to be posted to Singapore, then this website is for you. Whether or not you're single or married with kids, whether or not you are looking for a condominium, a bungalow, a semi-detached or a public condo, residing and renting a house in Singapore at this time is straightforward when you recognize the ins and outs, the dos and don'ts.

He is a rip-off!! Severely trust me he's on of the scammer agent. He made me believe that I've a spot to remain then when I was about to move the place isn't out there. Then he just took my deposit and agent's charge. By the best way he's also the landlord of the place i am presupposed to lease. He took my money and ran away. However I went to the HDB and complain him, additionally I complain straight to the police. Then the police called him and he got scared. Finally each penny that I gave him, he give it again since HDB and police office is supporting me. Don't be lazy to complain. Go straight to the police and complain these individuals.

i imagine there are good ethical brokers in Singapore. But i have encounter unhealthy experiencing the Christina Fong from realty master. She is admittedly an unprofessional and never moral one. Only considering of undercutiing and squeezing money from ptther people without defending interest of her personal shopper. Proceed to the section Training and look at a map of all worldwide colleges in Singapore or visit the section residential areas for detailed data on the place to stay and why. Information District and Location Have completed no less than 30 property transactions up to now three years. At least 10 of these transactions will have to be for private properties, and at the very least one other 10 needs to be for HDB flats (also known as public housing); Singapore-Indonesia Commercial Affiliation

Agents need to be very resourceful and so they have to work doubly onerous to succeed in out to extra consumers as a result of when the market swings, it turns into very aggressive," said PropNex Chief Executive Mohamed Ismail. "Beforehand, an agent might focus on one space, comparable to HDB, however at this time you may't." An motion for misrepresentation arises beneath the law of tort. A Misrepresentation happens when the Representor (Property Agent) makes a false assertion of existing truth with data of its falsity and with the intention that the Representee (Buyer or Seller) ought to act on it with the consequence that the Representee does act on it to his detriment. Metropolis & South West (D01-08) Tiong Bahru MRT Quiet C/Room F/Furnished w AC No Agent Price

On February 19 we had an appointment with the proprietor and his agent (A and H!) at the condominium to hand over the keys. They went by means of all the things with a wonderful tooth comb. An important lesson we learned over all this is that you simply MUST ENGAGE YOUR PERSONAL AGENT and never rely on the homeowners agent as his priority is to the proprietor not you. Nevertheless, last night time my own agent called me and informed me suddenly that ECG instructed them a buyer goes handy them a check within the morning, so we higher act fast or we may lose the property. Stamp responsibility is to be paid inside 14 days from the date of acceptance of the OTP or Sale and buy a house in singapore (click hyperlink) (S&P) Settlement. For more information, please go to www.iras.gov.sg - Gown Up Your House Woodlands East Industrial & Industrial Affiliation

There may also be a Code of Ethics and a Skilled Conduct Commonplace, as well as the introduction of disciplinary motion in opposition to errant brokers/businesses and dispute decision mechanisms. Preparations shall be made to manage the transition of existing agencies and agents to these new standards, which have but to be finalized. The Proposed Enchancment in High quality for Actual Property Businesses Wheelock Properties put up 95 items of The Panorama in Ang Mo Kio for balloting. With a reduction of 12 p.c, they claimed to promote 80 to eighty five units. Whereas developers are clearing their existing stock, every month there are new projects acquiring their HIGH and new sites released by the government to construct more private housing. The due date of each rental payment; or

To know who pays actual property commissions - whether or not it's sellers or buyers or both or if it is Landlord's or Tenant's or both Divisions vary. All Brokers work on a commission scheme that is determined by the experience, efficiency and various other elements equivalent to recruitment and many others. New brokers can receive from a range of 60%-70% of the full fee received by them from the closure of a deal. High producing brokers would possibly obtain 100% and pay the company (broker) a desk fee. Everybody else falls somewhere in between. Kindly discuss with the FAQ part of the CEA web site-www.cea.gov.sg Co-Broking / sharing of fee There isn't a set formulation. This is based on the demand and supply circumstances in the market. present agents have tertiary education.

Template:Persondata

Template:Link GA

  1. "Peirce", in the case of C.S. Peirce, always rhymes with the English-language word "terse" and so, in most dialects, is pronounced exactly like the English-language word "My name: Lindsey Gavin
    My age: 28
    Country: Sweden
    Home town: Vemdalen
    Postal code: 840 92
    Address: Buanvagen 79

    Look into my weblog :: http://www.hostgator1centcoupon.info/". See "Note on the Pronunciation of 'Peirce'", Peirce Project Newsletter, v. 1, nos. 3/4, Dec. 1994.
  2. Weiss, Paul (1934), "Peirce, Charles Sanders" in the Dictionary of American Biography. Arisbe Eprint.
  3. "Peirce, Benjamin", subheading "Charles Sanders", in Webster's Biographical Dictionary (1943/1960), Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
  4. 4.0 4.1 Peirce, C. S., "Letter, Peirce to A. Marquand", dated 1886, W 5:541–3, Google Preview. See Burks, Arthur W., "Review: Charles S. Peirce, The new elements of mathematics", Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society v. 84, n. 5 (1978), pp. 913–18, see 917. PDF Eprint. Also p. xliv in Houser, Nathan, Introduction, W 5.
  5. Fisch, Max, "Introduction", W 1:xvii, find phrase "One episode".
  6. "Peirce, Charles Sanders" (1898), The National Cyclopedia of American Biography, v. 8, p. 409.
  7. B:54–6
  8. B:363–4
  9. B:19-20, 53, 75, 245
  10. B:40
  11. 11.0 11.1 11.2 Burch, Robert (2001, 2010), "Charles Sanders Peirce", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  12. B:139
  13. B:61-2
  14. B:69
  15. B:368
  16. B:79-81
  17. 17.0 17.1 17.2 17.3 Moore, Edward C., and Robin, Richard S., eds., (1964), Studies in the Philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce, Second Series, Amherst: U. of Massachusetts Press. On Peirce the astronomer, see Lenzen's chapter.
  18. B:367
  19. Fisch, Max (1983), "Peirce as Scientist, Mathematician, Historian, Logician, and Philosopher", Studies in Logic (new edition), see p. x.
  20. See "Peirce Edition Project (UQÀM) - in short" from PEP-UQÀM.
  21. Houser, Nathan, "Introduction", W 5:xxviii-xxix, find "Allison".
  22. B:202
  23. 23.0 23.1 Houser, Nathan (1989), "Introduction", W 4:xxxviii, find "Eighty-nine".
  24. B:150–4, 195, 279–80, 289
  25. B:xv
  26. B:98–101
  27. B:141
  28. B:148
  29. Houser, Nathan, "Introduction", W 6, first paragraph.
  30. B:123, 368
  31. B:150–1, 368
  32. In 1885 (B:369); in 1890 and 1900 (B:215, 273); in 1891 (B:215–16); and in 1892 (B:151–2, 222).
  33. B:77
  34. B:191-2, 217, 270, 318, 321, 337.
  35. B:13
  36. B:369–74
  37. B:191
  38. B:246
  39. B:242
  40. B:271
  41. B:249–55
  42. B:371
  43. B:189
  44. B:370
  45. B:205–6
  46. B:374–6
  47. B:279–89
  48. B:261–4, 290–2, 324
  49. B:306–7 & 315–6
  50. Russell, Bertrand (1959), Wisdom of the West, p. 276.
  51. 51.0 51.1 Anellis, Irving H. (1995), "Peirce Rustled, Russell Pierced: How Charles Peirce and Bertrand Russell Viewed Each Other's Work in Logic, and an Assessment of Russell's Accuracy and Role in the Historiography of Logic", Modern Logic 5, 270–328. Arisbe Eprint.
  52. Popper, Karl (1972), Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach, p. 212.
  53. See Royce, Josiah, and Kernan, W. Fergus (1916), "Charles Sanders Peirce", The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Method v. 13, pp. 701–9. Arisbe Eprint.
  54. Ketner et al. (1986), Comprehensive Bibliography, see p. iii.
  55. Hookway, Christopher (2008), "Pragmatism", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  56. B:8
  57. Fisch, Max (1986), Peirce, Semeiotic, and Pragmatism, Kenneth Laine Ketner and Christian J. W. Kloesel, eds., Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana U. Pr.
  58. Theological Research Group in C.S. Peirce's Philosophy (Hermann Deuser, Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen; Wilfred Härle, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany).
  59. Burks, Arthur, Introduction, CP 7, p. xi.
  60. Robin, Richard S. (1967), Annotated Catalogue of the Papers of Charles S. Peirce. Amherst MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
  61. "The manuscript material now (1997) comes to more than a hundred thousand pages. These contain many pages of no philosophical interest, but the number of pages on philosophy certainly number much more than half of that. Also, a significant but unknown number of manuscripts have been lost." — Joseph Ransdell (1997), "Some Leading Ideas of Peirce's Semiotic", end note 2, 1997 light revision of 1977 version in Semiotica 19:157–78.
  62. Houser, Nathan, "The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Peirce Papers", Fourth Congress of the IASS, Perpignan, France, 1989. Signs of Humanity, v. 3, 1992, pp. 1259–68. Eprint
  63. Memorandum to the President of Charles S. Peirce Society by Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen, U. of Helsinki, March 29, 2012. Eprint.
  64. See for example "Collections of Peirce's Writings" at Commens, U. of Helsinki.
  65. See 1987 review by B. Kuklick (of Peirce by Christopher Hookway), in British Journal for the Philosophy of Sciencev. 38, n. 1, pp. 117-19. First page.
  66. Auspitz, Josiah Lee (1994), "The Wasp Leaves the Bottle: Charles Sanders Peirce", The American Scholar, v. 63, n. 4, autumn, 602–18. Arisbe Eprint.
  67. 67.0 67.1 Burks, Arthur W., "Review: Charles S. Peirce, The new elements of mathematics", Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society v. 84, n. 5 (1978), pp. 913–18 (PDF).
  68. Peirce (1860 MS), "Orders of Infinity", News from the Peirce Edition Project, September 2010 (PDF), p. 6, with the manuscript's text. Also see logic historian Irving Anellis's November 11, 2010 comment at peirce-l.
  69. Peirce (MS, winter of 1880–81), "A Boolean Algebra with One Constant", CP 4.12–20, W 4:218-21. Google Preview. See Roberts, Don D. (1973), The Existential Graphs of Charles S. Peirce, p. 131.
  70. Peirce (1881), "On the Logic of Number", American Journal of Mathematics v. 4, pp. 85-95. Reprinted (CP 3.252–88), (W 4:299–309). See See Shields, Paul (1997), "Peirce's Axiomatization of Arithmetic", in Houser et al., eds., Studies in the Logic of Charles S. Peirce.
  71. 71.0 71.1 Peirce (1885), "On the Algebra of Logic: A Contribution to the Philosophy of Notation", American Journal of Mathematics 7, two parts, first part published 1885, pp. 180–202 (see Houser in linked paragraph in "Introduction" in W 4). Presented, National Academy of Sciences, Newport, RI, 14–17 October 1884 (see EP 1, Headnote 16). 1885 is the year usually given for this work. Reprinted CP 3.359–403, W 5:162–90, EP 1:225–8, in part.
  72. 72.0 72.1 72.2 Putnam, Hilary (1982), "Peirce the Logician", Historia Mathematica 9, 290–301. Reprinted, pp. 252–60 in Putnam (1990), Realism with a Human Face, Harvard. Excerpt with article's last five pages.
  73. It was in Peirce's 1885 "On the Algebra of Logic". See Byrnes, John (1998), "Peirce's First-Order Logic of 1885", Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society v. 34, n. 4, pp. 949-76.
  74. Brady, Geraldine (2000), From Peirce to Skolem: A Neglected Chapter in the History of Logic, North-Holland/Elsevier Science BV, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
  75. See Peirce (1898), Lecture 3, "The Logic of Relatives" (not the 1897 Monist article), Reasoning and the Logic of Things , pp. 146–64, see 151.
  76. Peirce (1898), "The Logic of Mathematics in Relation to Education" in Educational Review v. 15, pp. 209–16 (via Internet Archive). Reprinted CP 3.553–62. See also his "The Simplest Mathematics" (1902 MS), CP 4.227–323.
  77. Lewis, Clarence Irving (1918), A Survey of Symbolic Logic, see ch. 1, §7 "Peirce", pp. 79–106, see p. 79 (Internet Archive). Note that Lewis's bibliography lists works by Frege, tagged with asterisks as important.
  78. Avery, John (2003) Information theory and evolution, p. 167; also Mitchell, Melanie, "My Scientific Ancestry".
  79. Beil, Ralph G. and Ketner, Kenneth (2003), "Peirce, Clifford, and Quantum Theory", International Journal of Theoretical Physics v. 42, n. 9, pp. 1957-1972.
  80. Houser, Roberts, and Van Evra, eds. (1997), Studies in the Logic of Charles Sanders Peirce, Indiana U., Bloomington, IN.
  81. Misak, ed. (2004), The Cambridge Companion to Peirce, Cambridge U., UK.
  82. Peirce (1893-1894, MS 949, p. 1)
  83. Peirce (1903 MS), CP 6.176: "But I now define a pseudo-continuum as that which modern writers on the theory of functions call a continuum. But this is fully represented by [...] the totality of real values, rational and irrational [...]."
  84. Peirce (1902 MS) and Ransdell, Joseph, ed. (1998), "Analysis of the Methods of Mathematical Demonstration", Memoir 4, Draft C, MS L75.90–102, see 99–100. (Once there, scroll down).
  85. See:
    • Peirce (1908), "Some Amazing Mazes (Conclusion), Explanation of Curiosity the First", The Monist, v. 18, n. 3, pp. 416-64, see 463-4. Reprinted CP 4.594-642, see 642.
    • Havenel, Jérôme (2008), "Peirce's Clarifications on Continuity", Transactions Winter 2008 pp. 68–133, see 119. Abstract.
  86. Peirce condemned the use of "certain likelihoods" (EP 2:108–9) even more strongly than he criticized Bayesian methods. Indeed Peirce used a bit of Bayesian inference in criticizing parapsychology (W 6:76).
  87. Miller, Richard W. (1975), "Propensity: Popper or Peirce?", British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (site), v. 26, n. 2, pp. 123–32. 21 year-old Glazier James Grippo from Edam, enjoys hang gliding, industrial property developers in singapore developers in singapore and camping. Finds the entire world an motivating place we have spent 4 months at Alejandro de Humboldt National Park.. Eprint.
  88. Haack, Susan and Kolenda, Konstantin (1977), "Two Fallibilists in Search of the Truth", Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, v. 51, pp. 63–104. Glazier Alfonzo from Chicoutimi, has lots of interests which include lawn darts, property developers house for sale in singapore singapore and cigar smoking. During the last year has made a journey to Cultural Landscape and Archaeological Remains of the Bamiyan Valley.
  89. 89.0 89.1 89.2 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Stigler78
  90. 90.0 90.1 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Hacking
  91. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named metr
  92. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named psych
  93. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named econom
  94. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named ling
  95. 95.0 95.1 Peirce (1897) "Fallibilism, Continuity, and Evolution", CP 1.141–75 (Eprint), placed by the CP editors directly after "F.R.L." (1899, CP 1.135–40).
  96. 96.0 96.1 Peirce (1903), CP 1.180-202 Eprint and (1906) "The Basis of Pragmaticism", EP 2:372–3, see "Philosophy" at CDPT.
  97. See in "Firstness", "Secondness", and "Thirdness" in CDPT.
  98. Peirce (1893), "The Categories" MS 403. Arisbe Eprint, edited by Joseph Ransdell, with information on the re-write, and interleaved with the 1867 "New List" for comparison.
  99. "Charles S. Peirce on Esthetics and Ethics: A Bibliography" (PDF) by Kelly A. Parker in 1999.
  100. Peirce (1902 MS), Carnegie Application, edited by Joseph Ransdell, Memoir 2, see table.
  101. See Esthetics at CDPT.
  102. 102.0 102.1 102.2 Peirce (1899 MS), "F.R.L." [First Rule of Logic], CP 1.135–40, Eprint
  103. 103.0 103.1 Peirce (1882), "Introductory Lecture on the Study of Logic" delivered September 1882, Johns Hopkins University Circulars, v. 2, n. 19, pp. 11–12 (via Google), November 1882. Reprinted (EP 1:210–14; W 4:378–82; CP 7.59–76). The definition of logic quoted by Peirce is by Peter of Spain.
  104. Peirce (1878), "The Doctrine of Chances", Popular Science Monthly, v. 12, pp. 604–15 (CP 2.645–68, W 3:276–90, EP 1:142–54). 31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.
  105. Peirce, CP 5.448 footnote, from "The Basis of Pragmaticism" in 1906.
  106. 106.0 106.1 Peirce, (1868), "Questions concerning certain Faculties claimed for Man", Journal of Speculative Philosophy v. 2, n. 2, pp. 103-14. On thought in signs, see p. 112. Reprinted CP 5.213-63 (on thought in signs, see 253), W 2:193-211, EP 2:11-27. Arisbe Eprint.
  107. 107.0 107.1 See rhetoric definitions at CDPT.
  108. Peirce (1902), The Carnegie Institute Application, Memoir 10, MS L75.361-2, Arisbe Eprint.
  109. 109.0 109.1 109.2 109.3 109.4 Peirce (1868), "Some Consequences of Four Incapacities", Journal of Speculative Philosophy v. 2, n. 3, pp. 140-57. Reprinted CP 5.264-317, W 2:211-42, EP 1:28-55. Arisbe Eprint.
  110. 110.0 110.1 Peirce, "Grounds of Validity of the Laws of Logic: Further Consequences of Four Incapacities", Journal of Speculative Philosophy v. II, n. 4, pp. 193-208. Reprinted CP 5.318-357, W 2:242-272 (PEP Eprint), EP 1:56-82.
  111. Peirce (1905), "What Pragmatism Is", The Monist, v. XV, n. 2, pp. 161-81, see 167. Reprinted CP 5.411-37, see 416. Arisbe Eprint.
  112. Peirce 1907, CP 5.484. Reprinted, EP 2:411 in "Pragmatism" (398–433).
  113. See "Quasi-mind" in CDPT.
  114. Peirce (1867), "Upon Logical Comprehension and Extension" (CP 2.391–426), (W 2:70–86).
  115. 115.0 115.1 See pp. 404–9 in "Pragmatism" in EP 2. Ten quotes on collateral experience from Peirce provided by Joseph Ransdell can be viewed here at peirce-l's Lyris archive. Note: Ransdell's quotes from CP 8.178–9 are also in EP 2:493–4, which gives their date as 1909; and his quote from CP 8.183 is also in EP 2:495–6, which gives its date as 1909.
  116. Peirce, letter to William James, dated 1909, see EP 2:492.
  117. 117.0 117.1 117.2 See "76 definitions of the sign by C.S.Peirce", collected by Robert Marty (U. of Perpignan, France).
  118. Peirce, A Letter to Lady Welby (1908), Semiotic and Significs, pp. 80–1: 31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.
  119. "Representamen", properly with the 'a' long and stressed (Template:IPAc-en Template:Respell), was adopted (not coined) by Peirce as his technical term for the sign as covered in his theory, in case a divergence should come to light between his theoretical version and the popular senses of the word "sign". He eventually stopped using "representamen". See EP 2:272–3 and Semiotic and Significs p. 193, quotes in "Representamen" at CDPT.
  120. 20 year-old Real Estate Agent Rusty from Saint-Paul, has hobbies and interests which includes monopoly, property developers in singapore and poker. Will soon undertake a contiki trip that may include going to the Lower Valley of the Omo.

    My blog: http://www.primaboinca.com/view_profile.php?userid=5889534
  121. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named ground
  122. 122.0 122.1 Peirce (1909), A Letter to William James, EP 2:492-502. Fictional object, 498. Object as universe of discourse, 492. See "Dynamical Object" at CDPT.
  123. See "Immediate Object", etc., at CDPT.
  124. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named 9signs
  125. 125.0 125.1 On the varying terminology, look up in CDPT.
  126. Popular Science Monthly, v. 13, pp. 470–82, see 472 or the book at Wikisource. CP 2.619–44, see 623.
  127. See, under "Abduction" at CDPT, the following quotes:
    • On correction of "A Theory of Probable Inference", see quotes from "Minute Logic", CP 2.102, c. 1902, and from the Carnegie Application (L75), 1902, Historical Perspectives on Peirce's Logic of Science v. 2, pp. 1031–1032.
    • On new logical form for abduction, see quote from Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism, 1903, CP 5.188–189.
    See also Santaella, Lucia (1997) "The Development of Peirce's Three Types of Reasoning: Abduction, Deduction, and Induction", 6th Congress of the IASS. Eprint.
  128. "Lectures on Pragmatism", 1903, CP 5.171.
  129. A Letter to J. H. Kehler (dated 1911), The New Elements of Mathematics v. 3, pp. 203–4, see in "Retroduction" at CDPT.
  130. James, William (1897), The Will to Believe, see p. 124.
  131. See Pragmaticism#Pragmaticism's name for discussion and references.
  132. 132.0 132.1 "That the rule of induction will hold good in the long run may be deduced from the principle that reality is only the object of the final opinion to which sufficient investigation would lead", in Peirce (1878 April), "The Probability of Induction", p. 718 (via Internet Archive ) in Popular Science Monthly, v. 12, pp. 705–18. Reprinted in CP 2.669–93, W 3:290–305, EP 1:155–69, elsewhere.
  133. Peirce (1902), CP 5.13 note 1.
  134. See CP 1.34 Eprint (in "The Spirit of Scholasticism"), where Peirce ascribed the success of modern science less to a novel interest in verification than to the improvement of verification.
  135. See Joseph Ransdell's comments and his tabular list of titles of Peirce's proposed list of memoirs in 1902 for his Carnegie application, Eprint
  136. Peirce (1905), "Issues of Pragmaticism", The Monist, v. XV, n. 4, pp. 481-99. Reprinted CP 5.438-63. Also important: CP 5.497-525.
  137. Peirce, "Philosophy and the Conduct of Life", Lecture 1 of the 1898 Cambridge (MA) Conferences Lectures, CP 1.616–48 in part and Reasoning and the Logic of Things, 105–22, reprinted in EP 2:27–41.
  138. 138.0 138.1 Peirce (1908), "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God", published in large part, Hibbert Journal v. 7, 90–112. Reprinted with an unpublished part, CP 6.452–85, Selected Writings pp. 358–79, EP 2:434–50, Peirce on Signs 260–78.
  139. See also Nubiola, Jaime (2004), "Il Lume Naturale: Abduction and God", Semiotiche I/2, 91–102.
  140. Peirce (c. 1906), "PAP (Prolegomena to an Apology for Pragmatism)" (MS 293), The New Elements of Mathematics v. 4, pp. 319–20, first quote under "Abduction" at CDPT.
  141. Peirce (1903), "Pragmatism – The Logic of Abduction", CP 5.195–205, especially 196. Eprint.
  142. Peirce, Carnegie application, MS L75.279-280: Memoir 27, Draft B.
  143. 143.0 143.1 See MS L75.329–330, from Draft D of Memoir 27 of Peirce's application to the Carnegie Institution: 31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.
  144. Peirce, C. S., "On the Logic of Drawing Ancient History from Documents", EP 2, see 107-9. On Twenty Questions, see 109: 31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.
  145. Peirce believed in God. See section #Philosophy: metaphysics.
  146. However, Peirce disagreed with Hegelian absolute idealism. See for example CP 8.131.
  147. Peirce (1868), "Nominalism versus Realism", Journal of Speculative Philosophy v. 2, n. 1, pp. 57-61. Reprinted (CP 6.619–24), (W 2:144–53).
  148. On developments in Peirce's realism, see:
    • Peirce (1897), "The Logic of Relatives", The Monist v. VII, n. 2 pp. 161–217, see 206 (via Google). Reprinted CP 3.456–552.
    • Peirce (1905), "Issues of Pragmaticism", The Monist v. XV, n. 4, pp. 481–99, see 495–6 (via Google). Reprinted (CP 5.438–63, see 453–7).
    • Peirce (c. 1905), Letter to Signor Calderoni, CP 8.205–13, see 208.
    • Lane, Robert (2007), "Peirce's Modal Shift: From Set Theory to Pragmaticism", Journal of the History of Philosophy, v. 45, n. 4.
  149. Peirce in his 1906 "Answers to Questions concerning my Belief in God", CP 6.495, Eprint, reprinted in part as "The Concept of God" in Philosophical Writings of Peirce, J. Buchler, ed., 1940, pp. 375–8: 31 year-old Systems Analyst Bud from Deep River, spends time with pursuits for instance r/c cars, property developers new condo in singapore singapore and books. Last month just traveled to Orkhon Valley Cultural Landscape.
  150. See his "The Doctrine of Necessity Examined" (1892) and "Reply to the Necessitarians" (1893), to both of which editor Paul Carus responded.
  151. Peirce (1891), "The Architecture of Theories", The Monist v. 1, pp. 161–76, see p. 170, via Internet Archive. Reprinted (CP 6.7–34) and (EP 1:285–97, see p. 293).
  152. See "tychism", "tychasm", "tychasticism", and the rest, at CDPT.
  153. Peirce (1893), "Evolutionary Love", The Monist v. 3, pp. 176–200. Reprinted CP 6.278–317, EP 1:352–72. Arisbe Eprint
  154. See p. 115 in Reasoning and the Logic of Things (Peirce's 1898 lectures).