Speculation of logic: Peirce

In a essay of 1895, Of reasoning in general, Charles Sanders Peirce(1839-1914) worked a speculation of human intelligence, and he didn’t said it but he has used the normal and philosophical method of Aristotle(b. Ch.384-322), this the speculative search, hence he has translated the truth, the human truth, this is the natural exercise: “Logic is the art of reasoning. The old times saw endless disputes as to whether logic was an art or a science. It is not worth while even to explain what those words were taken to mean. The present definition, respectable in its antiquity and superficiality, is intended merely to afford a rough preliminary notion of what this treatise is about. This chapter shall tell something more; but the student cannot expect to attain a real comprehension of the nature of logic till after he has gone through the book. The facts upon which logic is based come mostly within ordinary knowledge; though many escape ordinary notice. The science is largely, not wholly, one of rearrangement. Article 2. Reasoning is the process by which we attain a belief which we regard as the result of previous knowledge. Some beliefs are results of other knowledge without the believer suspecting it. After a sojourn among young people exclusively, an acquaintance met may seem to have aged more than he really has. This is a case of error. But not all such results are erroneous. A stranger with whom I am dealing may make an impression of being dishonest owing to indications too slight for me to know what they are. Yet the impression may be well founded. Such results are usually set down to "intuition." Though inferential in their nature, they are not exactly inferences. Again, a given belief may be regarded as the effect of another given belief, without our seeming to see clearly why or how. Such a process is usually called an inference; but it ought not to be called a rational inference, or reasoning. A blind force constrains us. Thus, Descartes declares himself obliged to believe that he exists because he remarks that he thinks. Yet he seems to doubt (in that stage of his inquiry) whether everything that thinks exists.”, Through inference we must think  to common intuition, the verb infer is from the Latin inferred, this is to bring in, that during centuries, as occurred for every word, has changed its mean, and now it is means to understand, to intuit. The word illation signifies a process of inference. Reasoning, in general, is sometimes called ratiocination. Argumentation is the expression of a reasoning. Argument may be mental or expressed. The belief to which an inference leads is called the conclusion, the beliefs from which it sets out are called the premises. (Sometimes written premisses) The fact that the premises necessitate the truth of the conclusion is called the consequence, or following of the conclusion from the premises.”; it is the description of normal think and intuition, certainly the judges are that he has described the obviousness, certainly, but it is so obvious that nobody has described before; and the premisses that Peirce has mentioned are the necessary argument so that every think has a logic conclusion; if we think well this think and this written of Peirce we can also, in opinion of author, that it is alone semiotic; in fact the description of think is semiotic, that we reading, can intuit because the description through the scripted signs enables to us of understand the significance, and report it to our daily experience, but read and recognize the signs, to understand the significance, because we can report it to our daily experience it is semiotic, because we understand some sign and we are informed about something. Regard to believes Peirce said: “Belief is a state of mind of the nature of a habit, of which the person is aware, and which, if he acts deliberately on a suitable occasion, would induce him to act in a way different from what he might act in the absence of such habit.”; the semiotic exam continues because Peirce, in same essay, said: “Thus, if a man believes a straight line to be the shortest distance between two points, then in case he wishes to proceed by the shortest way from one point to another, and thinks he can move in a straight line, he will endeavor to do so. If a man really believes that alcohol is injurious to him, and does not choose to injure himself, but still drinks for the sake of the momentary satisfaction, then he is not acting deliberately. But a habit of which we are not aware, or with which we are not deliberately satisfied, is not a belief. An act of consciousness in which a person thinks he recognizes a belief is called a judgment. The expression of a judgment is called in logic a proposition. The step in bold are necessary to understand the semiotic that after I have mentioned; “If a man really believes that alcohol is injurious to him, and does not choose to injure himself, but still drinks for the sake of the momentary satisfaction”, it is semiotic examination; because we can understanding from the daily reality the need of a man that drinks alone to pleasure but without to be drunk, and the description of judge is other step of semiotic science, because give to us an explication that is normal absolutely, daily and logic, hence nothing that can be important, but if we think it in semiotic sense and we report it to a semiotic code also the daily become interesting. Regard to sign Peirce given this judge: “A sign is a thing which serves to convey knowledge of some other thing, which it is said to stand for or represent. This thing is called the object of the sign; the idea in the mind that the sign excites, which is a mental sign of the same object, is called an interpretant of the sign. Signs are of three classes, namely, Icons (or images), Indices, and Symbols.”.   

Alessandro Lusana