MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Tuesday November 05, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to search
124 bytes added
, 15:12, 14 June 2009
Line 2,982: |
Line 2,982: |
| ==Note 13== | | ==Note 13== |
| | | |
− | <pre>
| + | The above-mentioned fact about the regular representations of a group is universally known as Cayley's Theorem, typically stated in the following form: |
− | The above-mentioned fact about the regular representations | |
− | of a group is universally known as "Cayley's Theorem". It | |
− | is usually stated in the form: "Every group is isomorphic
| |
− | to a subgroup of Aut(X), where X is a suitably chosen set
| |
− | and Aut(X) is the group of its automorphisms". There is
| |
− | in Peirce's early papers a considerable generalization
| |
− | of the concept of regular representations to a broad
| |
− | class of relational algebraic systems. The crux of
| |
− | the whole idea can be summed up as follows:
| |
| | | |
− | Contemplate the effects of the symbol
| + | {| align="center" cellpadding="6" width="90%" |
− | whose meaning you wish to investigate
| + | | Every group is isomorphic to a subgroup of <math>\operatorname{Aut}(X),</math> the group of automorphisms of a suitably chosen set <math>X\!</math>. |
− | as they play out on all the stages of
| + | |} |
− | conduct on which you have the ability
| |
− | to imagine that symbol playing a role.
| |
| | | |
− | This idea of definition by way of context transforming operators | + | There is a considerable generalization of these regular representations to a broad class of relational algebraic systems in Peirce's earliest papers. The crux of the whole idea is this: |
− | is basically the same as Jeremy Bentham's notion of "paraphrasis", | + | |
− | a "method of accounting for fictions by explaining various purported | + | {| align="center" cellpadding="6" width="90%" |
− | terms away" (Quine, in Van Heijenoort, 'From Frege to Gödel', p. 216). | + | | Contemplate the effects of the symbol whose meaning you wish to investigate as they play out on all the stages of conduct where you can imagine that symbol playing a role. |
− | Today we'd call these constructions "term models". This, again, is | + | |} |
− | the big idea behind Schönfinkel's combinators {S, K, I}, and hence | + | |
− | of lambda calculus, and I reckon you all know where that leads. | + | This idea of contextual definition by way of conduct transforming operators is basically the same as Jeremy Bentham's notion of ''paraphrasis'', a "method of accounting for fictions by explaining various purported terms away" (Quine, in Van Heijenoort, ''From Frege to Gödel'', p. 216). Today we'd call these constructions ''term models''. This, again, is the big idea behind Schönfinkel's combinators <math>\operatorname{S}, \operatorname{K}, \operatorname{I},</math> and hence of lambda calculus, and I reckon you know where that leads. |
− | </pre>
| |
| | | |
| ==Note 14== | | ==Note 14== |