Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{DISPLAYTITLE:Factorization And Reification}} | | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Factorization And Reification}} |
| | | |
− | ==Note 1== | + | {| align="center" cellspacing="6" width="90%" <!--QUOTE--> |
| + | | |
| + | <p>It is important to distinguish between the two functions of a word: 1st to denote something — to stand for something, and 2nd to mean something — or as Mr. Mill phrases it — to ''connote'' something.</p> |
| + | |
| + | <p>What it denotes is called its ''Sphere''. What it connotes is called its ''Content''. Thus the ''sphere'' of the word ''man'' is for me every man I know; and for each of you it is every man you know. The ''content'' of ''man'' is all that we know of all men, as being two-legged, having souls, having language, &c., &c.</p> |
| | | |
− | <pre> | + | <p>(Peirce 1866, Lowell Lecture 7, CE 1, 459).</p> |
− | | It is important to distinguish between the two
| + | |} |
− | | functions of a word: 1st to denote something --
| |
− | | to stand for something, and 2nd to mean something --
| |
− | | or as Mr. Mill phrases it -- to 'connote' something.
| |
− | |
| |
− | | What it denotes is called its 'Sphere'.
| |
− | | What it connotes is called its 'Content'.
| |
− | |
| |
− | | Thus the 'sphere' of the word 'man' is for me every man
| |
− | | I know; and for each of you it is every man you know.
| |
− | |
| |
− | | The 'content' of 'man' is all that we know of all men, as
| |
− | | being two-legged, having souls, having language, etc., etc.
| |
− | |
| |
− | | C.S. Peirce, 'Chronological Edition', CE 1, p. 459
| |
− | </pre> | |
| | | |
| The question is: What sort of thing is a connotation? Is it a sign? That is to say, is it yet another term? Or is it something like an abstract attribute, namely, a character, an intension, a property, or a quality? And while we're asking, does it really even matter? | | The question is: What sort of thing is a connotation? Is it a sign? That is to say, is it yet another term? Or is it something like an abstract attribute, namely, a character, an intension, a property, or a quality? And while we're asking, does it really even matter? |
Line 29: |
Line 18: |
| These days, I usually try to finesse the trick under the trumped up rubric of a factorization. So let me excavate my last attempts to explain this business and see if I can improve on them. | | These days, I usually try to finesse the trick under the trumped up rubric of a factorization. So let me excavate my last attempts to explain this business and see if I can improve on them. |
| | | |
− | ==Note 2== | + | ==Factoring Functions== |
| | | |
| <pre> | | <pre> |
Line 137: |
Line 126: |
| </pre> | | </pre> |
| | | |
− | ==Note 3== | + | ==Factoring Sign Relations== |
| | | |
| <pre> | | <pre> |
Line 323: |
Line 312: |
| </pre> | | </pre> |
| | | |
− | ==Note 4== | + | ==Nominalism and Realism== |
| | | |
| <pre> | | <pre> |