12 research outputs found
Semioethics and literary writing. Between Peirce and Bakhtin
In the early phase of its development, semiotics was understood as âsemeioticsâ and studied
symptoms. Today we propose to recover this ancient dimension of semiotics focussed
on health, care and the quality of life, and reorganise it in semioethical terms. In fact,
as interference increases in communication between the historico-social sphere and the
biological, between culture and nature, between the semiosphere and the biosphere, the need
for a âsemioethical turnâ in the study of signs with an understanding of the relation of signs to
values has become ever more urgent.
Literary writing is particularly interesting from this perspective thanks to its extraordinary
capacity to stage values that animate life to the best in terms of the properly human. These values
are characterized by high degrees of opening to the other, by responsiveness/answerability
toward the other, by a propensity for listening to the other, for giving time to the other.
Construed on relations of distancing and at once of affinity among signs, metaphorâ
or more broadly imagery, figurative languageâis emblematic of literary writing, though not
limited to it. As amply demonstrated by Victoria Welby, far from serving as a mere decorative
supplement, the figurative dimension of expression is structural to signifying processes, to the
acquisition itself of knowledge and understanding. Welbyâs work may be read as prefiguring
recent trends in language studies as represented by cognitive linguistics today.
Mikhail Bakhtin has also made an important contribution in this sense. He has developed
the study of signs in terms of moral philosophy and, in fact, his approach to semiotics is easily
oriented in the sense of semioethics. In such a framework he evidences the close relationship
between sign studies and literary writing. For a full understanding of the sense of Bakhtinâs
approach to studies on verbal language, it is important to highlight his insistence on the inexorable
interconnectionâwhich he describes as direct and dialecticalâbetween literary language and life.
Bakhtin deals with questions of literary writing from the perspective of literature itself.
His excursions outside the field of literature do not imply recourse to an external viewpoint
with claims to offering a description that is totalizing and systemic. On the contrary, Bakhtin
remains inside literature and never leaves it; literature is his observation post, the perspective
from which he conducts his critique, which is anti-systemic and detotalizing. Bakhtin reveals the
internal threads that connect literature to the extra-literary, thematizing the condition of structural
intertextuality in the connection between literary texts and extra-literary texts. In Bakhtinâs view,
the literary text subsists and develops in its specificity as a literary text thanks to its implication
with the external universe. Such implication is also understood in an ethical sense.
Charles Peirceâs semiotics as well has a focus on the relation between cognition, the
interpersonal relation, communication and moral value. He evidences the development of
signifying pathways (the open-ended chain of interpretants) which he describes as potentially
infinite, the role of the imagination and musement in abductive inferential processes, of similarity
(in particular the agapastic) in metaphor, and of metaphor in abduction with its capacity for
invention and innovation. All this makes Peirceâs Collected Papers another precious source for
reflection, together with Bakhtinâs texts, on the relation between semioethics and literary writin
Justice, fairness and juridical perfectibility
Aristotle had already underlined the importance of the relationship between justice and equity (a term I interpret as synonomous to fairness), which he analysed in great detail. Equity is the term which in the English translation of Aristotle's works corresponds to epiekes (Greek). A starting point for my paper will be Aristotle's considerations on the relationship between equity and justice. In English we have "equity," "impartiality," "fairness," "equitableness". Do we distinguish between these terms? is there any difference? In what follows I discuss equity, or better the relation between equity and justice, treating equity and fairness as the same thing. According to Aristotle equity and justice are neither completely the same nor generically different. If they are different either the just or the equitable is not good; or, if they are both good, they are the same (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Bk. V, Ch. 9, 10, p. 1019). Briefly, we could make the claim that equity (fairness) corrects the tendency that characterizes justice towards abstraction, impartiality and indifference, which in fact constitute the condition of possibility for justice to obtain. Equity opens to singularity, to unreplaceability, to uniqueness, shifting justice from the relation of indifference to the other, to the relation of unindifference to the other, to each and every other considered in his or her absolute unrepeatability
The biosemiotic imagination in the Victorian frames of mind : Newman, Eliot and Welby
This thesis traces the development of thought in the philosophical and other writings of three nineteenth-century thinkers, whose work exemplifies that centuryâs attempts to think beyond the divisions of culture from nature and to reconcile empirical science with metaphysical truth. Drawing on nineteenth-century debates on the origin of language and evolutionary theory, the thesis argues that the ideas of John Henry Newman, George Eliot and Lady Victoria Welby were cultural precursors to the biosemiotic thought of the second half of the twentieth century and beyond, specifically in the way in which these three thinkers sought to find a âcommon grammarâ between natural and human practices.
While only Lady Welby communicated with the scientist, logician and father of modern semiotics, Charles S. Peirce (1839-1914), all three contributed to the cultural sensibility that informed subsequent work in biology/ethology (Jakob von UexkĂŒll (1864-1944), zoosemiotics (Thomas A. Sebeok (1920-2001), and the development of biosemiotics (Thomas A. Sebeok and Jesper Hoffmeyer (1943-present), Kalevi Kull (1952-present) among others. Each of these nineteenth-century writerâs intellectual development show strong parallels with the interdisciplinary endeavour of biosemiotics. The latterâs observation that biology is semiotics, its postulation of the continuity between the natural and cultural world through semiosis and evolutionary semiotic scaffolding its emphasis on the coordination of organic life processes on all levels, from simple cells to human beings, via semiotic interactions that depend on interpretation, communication and learning, and its consequent refusal of Cartesian divide, all find distinct resonances with these earlier thinkers.
The thesis thus argues that Newman, Eliot and Welby all gave articulation to what the thesis identifies as the growth of a âbiosemiotic imagination.â It argues that Newman, Eliot and Lady Welby envisaged a unity, or a holistic understanding, of life based on a European developmental tradition of biology, philosophy and language which was familiar to Charles Darwin himself. This evolutionary ontology called forth a new epistemology grounded in a mode of unconscious creative inference (biosemiotic imagination) akin to Charles S. Peirceâs concept of abduction. Abduction is the logical operation which introduces a new idea and, as such, is the only source of adaptive and creative growth. For Peirce, it is closely tied to the growth of knowledge via the evolutionary action of sign relations. The thesis shows how these thinkers conceptualised their own version of what I suggest can be understood as this biosemiotic imagination and the implications this has for understanding creativity in nature and culture. For John Henry Newman, it was a common source of inspiration in religion and science. For George Eliot, it lay at the basis of any creative process, natural and cultural, between which it forged a link. Similarly to Eliot, Lady Victoria Welby saw abduction as a signifying process that subtends creativity both in nature and culture
Tartu Ălikooli toimetised. Tööd semiootika alalt. 1964-1992. 0259-4668
http://www.ester.ee/record=b1331700*es
Traces, testimony, paranoia
Prior to 1984, human rights documentation consisted of eyewitness and victim testimony. Since then forensic science has become a staple of human rights investigations. The resurgence of positivism consequence of these institutional and procedural shifts inspired the metaphorical conflation of physical evidence and physical traces with narrative and personal testimony. This thesis considers this tropic drift within human rights discourse as an example and a reflection of the epistemological ambivalence and semiotic confusion that still surrounds the indexical sign both outside and within critical theory. This thesis argues first that traces constitute non-linguistic sign-events whose formal properties motivate anecdotal and narrative modes of explanation and second, that the growing cultural importance of forensic science reifies a form of paranoic knowledge at the heart of western subjectivity
Detotaliseerimine ja tagasiulatuv jĂ”ud: musta pĂŒramiidi semiootika
VĂ€itekirja ĂŒldiseks probleemiks on semiootika integreeritavus. Detotalisatsioon kirjeldab semiootikatraditsiooni, mille kohaselt suletud terviklikkus pole vĂ”imalik, ning mis oma pĂ”hiliste teoreetiliste koordinaatidena nĂ€eb psĂŒhhoanalĂŒĂŒsi, ideoloogia kriitikat ja strukturaalset semioloogiat. Oluliseks analĂŒĂŒsivahendiks on autori poolt vĂ€lja töötatud nn âmusta pĂŒramiidiâ skeem-mudel, mille abil otsitakse vastust kĂŒsimusele: kuidas saab puhtdiferentsiaalne, erinevustel pĂ”hinev (internaalne) sĂŒsteem suhestuda vĂ€lisega (eksternaalsega)? JĂ€rgnevalt jĂ”utakse semiootikas esineva subjektiivse relativismi kriitikani ja vĂ”etakse kasutusele retroaktiivsuse mĂ”iste, mille kaudu kirjeldatakse vĂ€liseid mĂ”jusid. Semiootika osavaldu vaadeldakse retroaktiivsuse toimimise aspektist. âMusta pĂŒramiidiâ skeem-mudel ĂŒhendab hĂŒbriidselt Peirceâi ja Hjelmslevâ semiootikat, integreerides Peirceâi detotalisatsiooniga. Skeem eristab mĂ€rgifunktsiooni ja mĂ€rgiproduktsiooni ala ning selle jaotuse kaudu sulandab Peirceâi trihhotoomia kokku Saussureâi dihhotoomiaga. Taolisel sĂŒnteesil on kaks eelist. Esmalt on detotalisatsiooni subjektivistlik relativism ankurdatud kognitiivsemiootika ja biosemiootika empiiriliste ja loogiliste rakenduste poolt. Teisalt on kognitiivsemiootika ja biosemiootika rikastatud retroaktiivsuse tekstiliste protseduuridega, mis vĂ”imaldab ligipÀÀsu vĂ€lisele ilma mĂ€rgi mÀÀratlust kahjustamata. SeelĂ€bi on olemas artikulatoorse alusmaatriksi teaduslik seletus, kuid samuti vajadus teaduslikus semiootikas detotalisatsioonile iseloomuliku tekstuaalse eksperimenteerimise jĂ€rele. Just retroaktiivsus on see ĂŒhendav mĂ”iste, mis seob kaks semiootika lahusolevat valda. Integreerides ka kognitiivsemiootika ja biosemiootika detotaliseeritud semiootika pildile, pakub vĂ€itekiri kokkuvĂ”ttes mittereduktiivse ja empiirilise vastuse relativismi probleemile semiootikas, sĂ€ilitades seejuures semiootika teoreetilise terviklikkuse ja pakkudes vĂ€lja ĂŒhtse metakeele killustatud sotsiaalteaduste tarbeks.
âDetotalization describes the tradition of semiotics which takes psychoanalysis, ideology critique, and structural semiology as its major theoretic coordinates. Interest in these coordinates has declined against the ascent of the semiotics of Charles Peirce, the two approaches are sometimes construed as irreconcilable, but the dissertation seeks to integrate Peirce to the coordinates of detotalization. This integration requires that Peirce be read in the way that Jacques Derrida and Umberto Eco propose to read him, by moderating his realism. This is achieved through theorization of the notion of retroactivity. Chapters one through four restate the coordinates of detotalization in terms of retroactivity, and chapter five searches the domains of cognitive and biosemiotics for the Peircean equivalent of retroactivity. The black pyramid schema is a picture of the Peirce-Hjelmslev hybrid, where Peirce is integrated to detotalization. In the schema, semiotics is organized by the domains of sign function and sign production, and the Peircean trichotomy is reconciled to the Saussurean dichotomy by means of this division. The synthesis has two advantages. In one direction, the subjectivist relativism of detotalization is anchored by the empirical and logical applications of cognitive and biosemiotics. In the other direction, cognitive and biosemiotics are enhanced by the textual procedures of retroactivity, which account for the external without compromising the definition of the sign by importing a naĂŻve referent. There is a scientific explanation for the profound articulatory matrix, but there is also a need within scientific semiotics for the textual experimentation characteristic of detotalization. Retroactivity as the bridge concept between the two divided camps of semiotics also restores its original ambition, to provide a unifying vocabulary for the fractured social sciences.https://www.ester.ee/record=b540146
A world beside itself : Jakob von UexkĂŒll, Charles S. Peirce, and the genesis of a biosemiotic hypothesis
This thesis explores the conceptual origins of a biosemiotic understanding of the human as a consequence of the vital role of signs in the evolution of life. According to this challenge to definitions of man as the sole bearer of knowledge, human society and culture are not only characterised by the use and production of signs, human life and thought are the products of ongoing processes of semiosis.
Along with Thomas Sebeokâs argument concerning animal architecture, examples from Modernist and Contemporary art are presented to introduce a new perspective on the natural and cultural significance of acts of inhabitation. By tracing its historical development in the nineteenth and twentieth century via the concept of the environment, this perspective on both human and non-human life is shown to contest those methods of modern science that are rooted in anthropocentrism
The precedents of this perspective are then elaborated through an explication of the work of two of the forefathers of biosemiotics: the biologist Jakob von UexkĂŒll and the philosopher Charles S. Peirce. UexkĂŒllâs theory of the Umwelt demonstrated that in order to make sense of its surroundings each living organism must be situated within an integral world of signs. Peirceâs philosophical account of semiotics explained the evolution of signs in terms of processes of habit formation and the abductive power of thought. Together UexkĂŒll and Peirce provide an impetus for reconsidering the metaphorical implications of aesthetics in terms of the semiotic inheritance of ecological systems.
While having critically interrogated their differences especially with respect to their derivation from Kantian philosophy and German Idealism, in conclusion, the ideas of Peirce and UexkĂŒll on the reciprocity of life and signs are shown to mutually contribute to a more advanced comprehension of human subjectivity
A world beside itself : Jakob von UexkĂŒll, Charles S. Peirce, and the genesis of a biosemiotic hypothesis
This thesis explores the conceptual origins of a biosemiotic understanding of the human as a consequence of the vital role of signs in the evolution of life. According to this challenge to definitions of man as the sole bearer of knowledge, human society and culture are not only characterised by the use and production of signs, human life and thought are the products of ongoing processes of semiosis.
Along with Thomas Sebeokâs argument concerning animal architecture, examples from Modernist and Contemporary art are presented to introduce a new perspective on the natural and cultural significance of acts of inhabitation. By tracing its historical development in the nineteenth and twentieth century via the concept of the environment, this perspective on both human and non-human life is shown to contest those methods of modern science that are rooted in anthropocentrism
The precedents of this perspective are then elaborated through an explication of the work of two of the forefathers of biosemiotics: the biologist Jakob von UexkĂŒll and the philosopher Charles S. Peirce. UexkĂŒllâs theory of the Umwelt demonstrated that in order to make sense of its surroundings each living organism must be situated within an integral world of signs. Peirceâs philosophical account of semiotics explained the evolution of signs in terms of processes of habit formation and the abductive power of thought. Together UexkĂŒll and Peirce provide an impetus for reconsidering the metaphorical implications of aesthetics in terms of the semiotic inheritance of ecological systems.
While having critically interrogated their differences especially with respect to their derivation from Kantian philosophy and German Idealism, in conclusion, the ideas of Peirce and UexkĂŒll on the reciprocity of life and signs are shown to mutually contribute to a more advanced comprehension of human subjectivity