Changes

<p>The third class embraces terms whose logical form involves the conception of bringing things into relation, and which require the addition of more than one term to complete the denotation.  They discriminate not only with consciousness of discrimination, but with consciousness of its origin.  They regard  an object as medium or third between two others, that is as conjugative;  as giver of --- to ---, or buyer of --- for --- from ---.  These may be termed ''conjugative terms''.</p>

<p>The third class embraces terms whose logical form involves the conception of bringing things into relation, and which require the addition of more than one term to complete the denotation.  They discriminate not only with consciousness of discrimination, but with consciousness of its origin.  They regard  an object as medium or third between two others, that is as conjugative;  as giver of --- to ---, or buyer of --- for --- from ---.  These may be termed ''conjugative terms''.</p>

<p>The conjugative term involves the conception of ''third'', the relative that of second or ''other'', the absolute term simply considers ''an'' object.  No fourth class of terms exists involving the conception of ''fourth'', because when that of ''third'' is introduced, since it involves the conception of bringing objects into relation, all higher numbers are given at once, inasmuch as the conception of bringing objects into relation is independent of the number of members of the relationship.  Whether this ''reason'' for the fact that there is no fourth class of terms fundamentally different from the third is satisfactory of not, the fact itself is made perfectly evident by the study of the logic of relatives.</p>

<p>The conjugative term involves the conception of ''third'', the relative that of second or ''other'', the absolute term simply considers ''an'' object.  No fourth class of terms exists involving the conception of ''fourth'', because when that of ''third'' is introduced, since it involves the conception of bringing objects into relation, all higher numbers are given at once, inasmuch as the conception of bringing objects into relation is independent of the number of members of the relationship.  Whether this ''reason'' for the fact that there is no fourth class of terms fundamentally different from the third is satisfactory of not, the fact itself is made perfectly evident by the study of the logic of relatives. (Peirce, CP 3.63).</p>

 

<p>C.S. Peirce, CP 3.63</p>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

==Selection 2==

==Selection 2==

<pre>

<blockquote>

| Numbers Corresponding to Letters

<p>'''Numbers Corresponding to Letters'''</p>

 

| I propose to use the term "universe" to denote that class of individuals

<p>I propose to use the term "universe" to denote that class of individuals ''about'' which alone the whole discourse is understood to run.  The universe, therefore, in this sense, as in Mr.&nbsp;De&nbsp;Morgan's, is different on different occasions.  In this sense, moreover, discourse may run upon something which is not a subjective part of the universe;  for instance, upon the qualities or collections of the individuals it contains.</p>

| 'about' which alone the whole discourse is understood to run.  The universe,

 

| therefore, in this sense, as in Mr. De Morgan's, is different on different

<p>I propose to assign to all logical terms, numbers;  to an absolute term, the number of individuals it denotes;  to a relative term, the average number of things so related to one individual.  Thus in a universe of perfect men (''men''), the number of "tooth of" would be 32.  The number of a relative with two correlates would be the average number of things so related to a pair of individuals;  and so on for relatives of higher numbers of correlates.  I propose to denote the number of a logical term by enclosing the term in square brackets, thus <nowiki>[</nowiki>''t''<nowiki>]</nowiki>. (Peirce, CP 3.65).</p>

| occasions.  In this sense, moreover, discourse may run upon something which

</blockquote>

| is not a subjective part of the universe;  for instance, upon the qualities

| or collections of the individuals it contains.

| I propose to assign to all logical terms, numbers;  to an absolute term,

| the number of individuals it denotes;  to a relative term, the average

| number of things so related to one individual.  Thus in a universe of

| perfect men ('men'), the number of "tooth of" would be 32.  The number

| of a relative with two correlates would be the average number of things

| so related to a pair of individuals;  and so on for relatives of higher

| numbers of correlates.  I propose to denote the number of a logical term

| by enclosing the term in square brackets, thus ['t'].

| C.S. Peirce, CP 3.65

|'Collected Papers' (CP 3.45-149), 'Chronological Edition' (CE 2, 359-429).

</pre>

==Commentary Note 2==

==Commentary Note 2==