Published on Commens (http://www.commens.org)

Home >

Commens
Digital Companion to C. S. Peirce
Disquiparance
source 
annotations
mail  facebook twitter pdf print  view
1895-6 [c.] | That Categorical and Hypothetical Propositions are one in essence, with some connected matters | CP 1.567

The logical and hemilogical relations belong to the old class of relations of reason, while relations in re are alogical. But there are a few not unimportant relations of reason which are likewise alogical. In my paper of 1867, I committed the error of identifying those relations constituted by non-relative characters with relations of equiparance, that is, with necessarily mutual relations, and the dynamical relations with relations of disquiparance, or possibly non-mutual relations. Subsequently, falling out of one error into another, I identified the two classes respectively with relations of reason and relations in re.

The "paper of 1867" is 'On a New List of Categories'

source 
mail  facebook twitter pdf print  view
1901-1902 [c.] | Definitions for Baldwin's Dictionary [R] | MS [R] 1147

Most relations concern ordered relations: they are called disquiparances.

source 
mail  facebook twitter pdf print  view
1906-7 | PAP [ed.] | NEM 4:325

Which is the more primitive (or fundamental, or simple) form of relation, that of an Equiparance (i.e. a reciprocal relation), or that of a Disquiparance? I say that it is the Disquiparance, or rather, it is the Opponency, or relation of which a specialization may be a Disquiparance.

Citation
‘Disquiparance’. Term in M. Bergman & S. Paavola (Eds.), The Commens Dictionary: Peirce's Terms in His Own Words. New Edition. Retrieved from http://www.commens.org/dictionary/term/disquiparance/page, 06.02.2023.
See also
Relation | Dyadic Relation | Equiparance | Duality