The semiotic relation between object and interpretant through sign or symbol.
The triadic relation was the great discovery of C.S. PEIRCE, according to whom "…. but one triadic node-type, with two in-branches and one out-branch is necessary for infinite variety of structure" (Quoted by H.M. PAYNTER, 1968, p.76).
Many contemporary developments as for example general semantics (KORZYBSKI), learning matrixes (STEINBUCH), constructivism (von GLASERSFELD), generic design (WARFIELD), process theory (SABELLI) have been, directly or not, influenced by the triadic model.
The basic triadic act is naming, i.e. creating a symbolic bridge between subject and object. Obviously, it is the subject who constructs the bridge. The ignorance of the naming act and its relative value, induces ontologie absolutism with its aftermath of logical, psychological, conceptual and practical problems. As a result, J. WARFIELD insists in his lectures that "Questions are superior to assertive hypotheses as bases for scientific study" and that "Every question involves contextual implications" and if and when a point can be reached "where there is no contextual implication (we reach) the axiomatic domain" (pers. comm.).
Of course, within the axiomatic domain, we cannot speak about anything concrete: we have reached mental organizational closure. No systemist should ever forget this when constructing a model.
F. FRISCHKNECHT and J.van GIGCH have used an "Information-System-Processing triad" as the "Common core of human disciplines" (1989, p.239-252).
- 1) General information
- 2) Methodology or model
- 3) Epistemology, ontology and semantics
- 4) Human sciences
- 5) Discipline oriented
To cite this page, please use the following information:
Bertalanffy Center for the Study of Systems Science (2020). Title of the entry. In Charles François (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics (2). Retrieved from www.systemspedia.org/[full/url]
We thank the following partners for making the open access of this volume possible: