Changes

Line 395: Line 395:     
Figure 9 illustrates Dewey's “Sign of Rain” example, tracing the structure and function of the sign relation as it informs the activity of inquiry, including both the movements of surprise explanation and intentional action.  The dyadic faces of the sign relation are labeled with just a few of the loosest terms that apply, indicating the “significance” of signs for eventual occurrences and the “correspondence&rdqu; of ideas with external orientations.  Nothing essential is meant by these dyadic role distinctions, since it is only in special or degenerate cases that their shadowy projections can maintain enough information to determine the original sign relation.
 
Figure 9 illustrates Dewey's “Sign of Rain” example, tracing the structure and function of the sign relation as it informs the activity of inquiry, including both the movements of surprise explanation and intentional action.  The dyadic faces of the sign relation are labeled with just a few of the loosest terms that apply, indicating the “significance” of signs for eventual occurrences and the “correspondence&rdqu; of ideas with external orientations.  Nothing essential is meant by these dyadic role distinctions, since it is only in special or degenerate cases that their shadowy projections can maintain enough information to determine the original sign relation.
 +
 +
{| align="center" cellpadding="4" style="text-align:center"
 +
| [[Image:Signs And Inquiry In Dewey.gif|600px]]
 +
|-
 +
| <math>\text{Figure 9.  Signs and Inquiry in Dewey}</math>
 +
|}
    
==2. Functional Conception of Quantification Theory==
 
==2. Functional Conception of Quantification Theory==
12,080

edits