MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Monday October 27, 2025
Jump to navigationJump to search
13 bytes added
, 17:38, 11 September 2010
| Line 1,715: |
Line 1,715: |
| | This work is a particular inquiry into the nature of inquiry in general. As a consequence, every conceptual construct that appears in it will take on a double aspect. | | This work is a particular inquiry into the nature of inquiry in general. As a consequence, every conceptual construct that appears in it will take on a double aspect. |
| | | | |
| − | To illustrate, let take the concept of a "sign relation" as an example and let me use it to speak about my own agency in this inquiry. All I need to say about a sign relation at this point is that it is a three-place relation, and therefore can be imagined as a relational data-base with three columns, in this case naming the "object", the "sign", and the "interpretant" of the relation at each moment in time of the corresponding "sign process". | + | To illustrate, let us take the concept of a ''sign relation'' as an example and let me use it to speak about my own agency in this inquiry. All I need to say about a sign relation at this point is that it is a three-place relation, and therefore can be imagined as a relational data-base with three columns, in this case naming the ''object'', the ''sign'', and the ''interpretant'' of the relation at each moment in time of the corresponding ''sign process''. |
| | | | |
| | At any given moment of this inquiry I will be participating in a certain sign relation that constitutes the informal context of my activity, the full nature of which I can barely hope to conceptualize in explicitly formal terms. At times, the object of this informal sign relation will itself be a sign relation, typically one that is already formalized or one that I have a better hope of formalizing, but it could conceivably be the original sign relation with which I began. | | At any given moment of this inquiry I will be participating in a certain sign relation that constitutes the informal context of my activity, the full nature of which I can barely hope to conceptualize in explicitly formal terms. At times, the object of this informal sign relation will itself be a sign relation, typically one that is already formalized or one that I have a better hope of formalizing, but it could conceivably be the original sign relation with which I began. |