Changes

Line 3,479: Line 3,479:  
===Commentary Note 12===
 
===Commentary Note 12===
   −
<pre>
+
Let us make a few preliminary observations about the "logical sign of involution", as Peirce uses it here:
Let us make a few preliminary observations about the
  −
"logical sign of involution", as Peirce uses it here:
     −
| The Sign of Involution
+
<blockquote>
|
+
<p>'''The Sign of Involution'''</p>
| I shall take involution in such a sense that x^y
  −
| will denote everything which is an x for every
  −
| individual of y.
  −
|
  −
| Thus
  −
|
  −
| 'l'^w
  −
|
  −
| will be a lover of every woman.
  −
|
  −
| C.S. Peirce, CP 3.77
     −
In arithmetic, the "involution" x^y, or the "exponentiation" of x
+
<p>I shall take involution in such a sense that ''x''<sup>''y''</sup> will denote everything which is an ''x'' for every individual of ''y''.</p>
to the power of y, is the iterated multiplication of the factor x,
  −
repeated as many times as there are ones making up the exponent y.
     −
In analogous fashion, 'l'^w is the iterated multiplication of 'l',
+
<p>Thus</p>
repeated as many times as there are individuals under the term w.
     −
For example, suppose that the universe of discourse has,
+
: <p>'l'<sup>w</sup></p>
among other things, just the three women, W_1, W_2, W_3.
  −
This could be expressed in Peirce's notation by writing:
     −
w  = W_1 +, W_2 +, W_3.
+
<p>will be a lover of every woman.</p>
 +
 
 +
<p>(C.S. Peirce, CP 3.77).</p>
 +
</blockquote>
 +
 
 +
In arithmetic, the "involution" ''x''<sup>''y''</sup>, or the "exponentiation" of ''x'' to the power of ''y'', is the iterated multiplication of the factor ''x'', repeated as many times as there are ones making up the exponent ''y''.
 +
 
 +
In analogous fashion, 'l'<sup>w</sup> is the iterated multiplication of 'l', repeated as many times as there are individuals under the term w.
 +
 
 +
For example, suppose that the universe of discourse has, among other things, just the three women, W<sub>1</sub>, W<sub>2</sub>, W<sub>3</sub>. This could be expressed in Peirce's notation by writing:
 +
 
 +
: w = W<sub>1</sub> +, W<sub>2</sub> +, W<sub>3</sub>.
    
In this setting, we would have:
 
In this setting, we would have:
   −
'l'^w = 'l'^(W_1 +, W_2 +, W_3)  =  'l'W_1 , 'l'W_2 , 'l'W_3.
+
: 'l'<sup>w</sup> = 'l'<sup>(W<sub>1</sub> +, W<sub>2</sub> +, W<sub>3</sub>)</sup> =  'l'W<sub>1</sub> , 'l'W<sub>2</sub> , 'l'W<sub>3</sub>.
   −
That is, a lover of every woman in the universe of discourse
+
That is, a lover of every woman in the universe of discourse would be a lover of W<sub>1</sub> and a lover of W<sub>2</sub> and lover of W<sub>3</sub>.
would be a lover of W_1 and a lover of W_2 and lover of W_3.
  −
</pre>
      
==References==
 
==References==
12,080

edits