12,080
edits
Changes
MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Saturday November 30, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to searchDirectory:Jon Awbrey/Papers/Inquiry Driven Systems : Part 6 (view source)
Revision as of 20:50, 17 September 2012
, 20:50, 17 September 2012→6.24. Literal Intensional Representations: markup
In this section I prepare the grounds for building bridges between ERs and IRs of sign relations. To establish an initial foothold on either side of the distinction and to gain a first march on connecting the two sites of the intended construction, I introduce an intermediate mode of description called a ''literal intensional representation'' (LIR).
In this section I prepare the grounds for building bridges between ERs and IRs of sign relations. To establish an initial foothold on either side of the distinction and to gain a first march on connecting the two sites of the intended construction, I introduce an intermediate mode of description called a ''literal intensional representation'' (LIR).
Any LIR is a nominal form of IR that has exactly the same level of detail as an ER, merely shifting the interpretation of primitive terms from an extensional to an intensional modality, namely, from a frame of reference terminating in ''points'', ''atomic elements'', ''elementary objects'', or ''real particulars'' to a frame of reference terminating in ''qualities'', ''basic features'', ''fundamental properties'', or ''simple propositions''. This modification, that translates the entire set of elementary objects in an ER into a parallel set of fundamental properties in a LIR, constitutes a form of modulation that can be subtle or trivial, depending on one's point of view. Regarded as trivial, it tends to go unmarked, leaving it up to the judgment of the interpreter to decide whether the same sign is meant to denote a point, a particular, a property, or a proposition. An interpretive variance that goes unstated tends to be treated as final. It is always possible to bring in more signs in an attempt to signify the variants intended, but it needs to be noted that every effort to control the interpretive variance by means of these epithets and expletives only increases the level of liability for accidental errors, if not the actual probability of misinterpretation. For the sake of this introduction, and in spite of these risks, I treat the distinction between extensional and intensional modes of interpretation as worthy of note and deserving of an explicit notation.
<pre>
<pre>
Table 50 ...
Table 50 ...
