Advertisement

Peirce on Diagrammatic Reasoning and Semeiotic

  • Javier LegrisEmail author
  • Cassiano Terra Rodrigues
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10871)

Abstract

Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914) is one of the “grounding fathers” of mathematical logic, having developed all of the key formal results of modern logic. He did it firstly (from 1860 on) in the algebraic tradition of mathematical logic stemming from Boole, combining it with the logic of relations, explicitly developed by Augustus De Morgan. From this, Peirce obtained a system that included quantifiers—a term he seems to have invented—and relative predicates. Developing his own system of relative terms, Peirce started from Boole’s system, trying to apply it to De Morgan’s logic of relations. Indeed, Peirce’s aim is to include the logic of relations into the calculus of algebra using his own system of algebraic signs. On the one hand, Peirce’s algebraic notation will be presented, specially: (a) relative terms as iconic representations of logical relations; (b) Peirce’s quantifiers and the passage from a linear notation to a diagrammatic one. On the other hand, Peirce’s graphical notation will be presented, specially: (a) his Alpha and Beta systems, which are fully compatible with what is nowadays called first-order logic, (b) and his unfinished Gamma system, designed for second-order logic and modal logic.

Keywords

Relatives Quantifiers Diagrammatic Reasoning Existential Graphs Semeiotic 

References

  1. 1.
    Peirce, C.S.: Description of a notation for the logic of relatives, resulting from an amplification of the conceptions of Boole’s Calculus of logic (1867). In: Moore, E., et al. (eds.) Writings of Charles Sanders Peirce: A Chronological Edition, vol. 2: 1867–1971, pp. 359–429. Indiana University Press, Bloomington (1984)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Peirce, C.S.: Of reasoning in general (1895). In: The Peirce Edition Project (ed.) The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings, vol. 2: 1893–1913, pp. 11–26. Indiana University Press, Bloomington (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Legris, J.: Peirce’s diagrammatic logic and the opposition between logic as calculus vs. logic as Universal language. Rev. Port. De Filos. 73(3/4), 1095–1114 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.17990/RPF/2017_73_3_1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harel, D.: On visual formalisms. In: Glasgow, J., Narayanan, N.H., Chandrasekaran, B. (eds.) Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspective, pp. 235–271. The AAAI Press/The MIT Press, Menlo Park, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rodrigues, C.T.: The method of scientific discovery in Peirce’s philosophy: deduction, induction, and abduction. Log. Univ. 5(1), 127–164 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peirce, C.S.: Carnegie application (L 75, 1902). In: Eisele, C. (ed.) The New Elements of Mathematics, vol. 4, pp. 36–73. Mouton Publishers/Humanities Press, The Hague, Atlantic Highlands (1976)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peirce, C.S.: On the algebra of logic: contribution to a philosophy of notation (1885). In: Fisch, M.H., Kloesel, C.J.W., et al. (eds.) Writings of Charles Sanders Peirce: A Chronological Edition, vol. 5: 1884–1886, pp. 161–190. Indiana University Press, Bloomington (1993)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto Interdisciplinario de Economía Política de Buenos AiresCONICET-Universidad de Buenos AiresBuenos AiresArgentina
  2. 2.Departamento de FilosofiaPontifícia Universidade Católica de São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations