Alas, and yet what are you, my written and painted thoughts! It is not long ago that you were still so many‑coloured, young and malicious, so full of thorns and hidden spices you made me sneeze and laugh — and now? You have already taken off your novelty and some of you, I fear, are on the point of becoming truths: they already look so immortal, so pathetically righteous, so boring!

Nietzsche • Beyond Good and Evil

The discussion to follow describes a particular semantics for painted cactus languages, detailing what meanings are meant to be associated with their bare syntactic forms. Doing that supplies an interpretation for the parametric family of formal languages in view but it needs be remembered that it forms just one of many such interpretations which may be conceivable and even viable in the long run. Indeed, the distinction between the object domain and the sign domain can be observed in the fact that many languages can be deployed to depict the same set of objects and any language worth its salt is bound to give rise to a host of salient interpretations.

Resources

• Cactus Language • Mechanics
• Survey of Animated Logical Graphs
• Survey of Theme One Program cc: Academia.edu • BlueSky • Laws of Form • Mathstodon • Research Gate cc: Conceptual Graphs • Cybernetics • Structural Modeling • Systems Science

This entry was posted in Automata, Boolean Algebra, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Grammars, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Propositional Calculus, Visualization and tagged Automata, Boolean Algebra, Boolean Functions, C.S. Peirce, Cactus Graphs, Differential Logic, Equational Inference, Formal Grammars, Formal Languages, Graph Theory, Logic, Logical Graphs, Mathematics, Minimal Negation Operators, Painted Cacti, Propositional Calculus, Visualization. Bookmark the permalink.