The Tetrast
Sketcher of various interrelated fourfolds.

Fantastic Four.

April 8, 2005.
.
This message which I sent in response to Gary Richmond at the peirce-l forum on February 24, 2004, seems worth reproducing here. (Since this post raises the issue of my beliefs, I should say that, seriously speaking, I’m not religious, not anti-religious or religion-phobic either, and don’t belong to or wish to join any particularly anti-religious groups. ’Nuff said.)

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Gary wrote,

then Osiris/Isis/Seth/Nepthys (are these the 4 Ben adores? :-),

I fully admit that there is a not common craze for tetrachotomies. I do not know but the psychiatrists have provided a name for it. If not, they should not. “Tetrachomania,” fortunately, is tottering ready to be pre-empted for a totally different passion, rife among sale clerks in the US, one for the 25-cent piece; but still the former might be called tetradomany, stressing as de rigueur the junctural vowel, as if to rhyme with “Astronomy Domine.” I am not so afflicted; but I find myself obliged, for sooth’s trace, to make such a large number of tetrachotomies, hexadecachotomies, & the occasional 65,536-chotomy, that I could not wonder at it if my reader(s), especially those of them who are in the way of knowing how rare the malady is, should suspect, or even opine, or flat-out believe, & be willing to wager considerable sums of money, that I am a rare victim of it.

I did once, in spite of the tetradomany or tesserophilia that some might ascribe to me, hit upon a physico-mathematical structure, illustrated below, from which I could not eradicate the threes. It is a mix of threes & fours, at which I arrived when I wondered what other conjecturable particles besides tachyons may be conceived through the exploration of special-relativistic equations. Most of the bizarre particles thence struggling into my imagination baffled me & I didn’t really know what I was doing. The structure’s resemblance to kaleidoscopic view may be more than coincidence. But, as touching upon the case of a conjecture of particles at rest invariantly with respect to all tardyonic (that’s us) frames of reference, I might add that lately I have read about a special kind of standing waves whose interaction with the particles which we call massive would produce their inertial behaviors. At any rate, let it not be said that I have never left a trichotomy as it stood.


As for my imputedly adoring the four deities you mentioned, that’s just a false rumor, or if not, let’s just keep it under our hats, for I prefer Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, & a fourth deity to be named later.

Best regards,
Ben U d e 11

HOME || Deductive vs. ampliative; also, repletive vs. attenuative || Plausibility, verisimilitude, novelty, nontriviality, versus optima, probabilities, information, n-ary givens || Logical quantity & research scopes [...] || Telos, entelechy, Aristotle's Four Causes, pleasure, & happiness || Compare to Aristotle, Aquinas, & Peirce. || Semiotic triad versus tetrad. || Tetrachotomies of future-oriented virtues and vices. || What of these other fours? || Fantastic Four. || Why tetrastic? || The Four Causes, their principles, special relativity, Thomistic beauty. || Logical quantities, categories of research, and categories. || Semiotics: collaterally based recognition, the proxy, and counting-as. || A periodic table of aspects of humanity [...]
.
.
.
.