A Critical Examination of Peirce's Theory of Natural Inferences

Peirce’s theory of inferences is scrutinised and shown that any inference needs to satisfy a logical principle. Moreover, it is shown there are here some flaws due to his basic view that we can improve knowledge through reasoning. At the opposite, I shall show that we need an associative moment and that the business of abduction is to narrow denotation, while that of induction is to enlarge connotation. The historical example of the debate between EPR, Bohr and Schrödinger is reviewed. Moreover, a circle of inferences is proposed.