Building a Scaffold: Semiosis in Nature and Culture

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：John Deely
• 关键词：Action of signs ; Being in futuro ; Biosemiotics ; Genuine ; Indirect result ; Influence of the future (“vis a prospecto- ; Interpretant ; Life ; Physiosemiosis ; Pregenerate ; Sebeok ; Secondness ; Semiosis ; Triadic relation
• 刊名：Biosemiotics
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：August 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：8
• 期：2
• 页码：341-360
• 全文大小：337 KB
• 参考文献：Aquinas, T. (c.1265/6). Quaestiones disputatae de potentia. In R. P. Pauli, M. Pession (Eds.), Quaestiones disputatae, Vol. II, 9th ed. rev. by P. Bazzi, M. Calcaterra, T. S. Centi, E. Odetto, and P. M. Pession (Turin: Marietti, 1953), pp. 7-76; in Busa ed. 3, 186-69.
  “Asteroid Impact- (2011). Online at http://?www.?pbs.?org/?wgbh/?evolution/?extinction/?dinosaurs/?asteroid.?html .
  Benedict, G.A. (1985). “What Are Representamens?-Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, Vol. XXI, No. 2 (Spring, 1985), pp. 240-70.
  Broden, T.F. (2008). Towards a State of the Semiotic Art in 2008 North America, Preface to the Semiotics 2008 Semiotic Society of America Proceedings volume. In J. Deely, & L. Sbrocchi (Eds.), Ottawa: Legas, 2009, xv–xxxvii.
  Burks, A. W. (1958). Bibliography of the Works of Charles Sanders Peirce. In A. W. Burks (Ed.), The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, Volume VIII (pp. 249-30). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  Colapietro, V., & Olshewsky T. (Eds.) (1996). Peirce’s Doctrine of Signs (conference papers from the 1989 Harvard Peirce Sesquicentennial Congress; Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter).
  Deely, J. (1969). The Philosophical Dimensions of the Origin of Species, The Thomist XXXIII, Part I, 75-49, Part II, 251-42.
  Deely, J. (1982). On the Notion of Phytosemiotics. In J. Deely, J. Evans (Eds.), Semiotics (pp. 541-54), Lanham: University Press of America, 1987; reprinted with minor revision in Deely, Williams, and Kruse 1986: 96-03.
  Deely, J. (1989). The Grand Vision. In Colapietro & Olshewsky (Eds.) 1996: 45-7.
  Deely, J. (1990). Physiosemiosis and Phytosemiosis, Chapter 6 of Basics of Semiotics (pp. 83-04). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  Deely, J. (1991). Semiotics and Biosemiotics: Are Sign-Science and Life-Science Coextensive?. In T. A. Sebeok & J. Umiker-Sebeok (Eds.), Biosemiotics. The Semiotic Web 1991. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1992, 45-5. Since revised in Deely 1994a.
  Deely, J. (1993). How Does Semiosis Effect Renvoi?, the Thomas A. Sebeok Fellowship Inaugural Lecture delivered at the 18th Annual Meeting of the Semiotic Society of America, October 22, 1993, St. Louis; published in The American Journal of Semiotics 11.1- (1994), 11-1. Reprinted in Deely 1994: 201-44.
  Deely, J. (1994a). New Beginnings. Early Modern Philosophy and Postmodern Thought. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  Deely, J. (1994a). How Do Signs Work?. In Deely: 151-82.
  Deely, J. (1995). A New Beginning for the Sciences, presented at the November 2-, 1995, Symposium “Semiotics as a Bridge between the Humanities and the Sciences-organized at Victoria College of the University of Toronto by Prof. Marcel Danesi; selected papers published. In P. Perron, L. G. Sbrocchi, P. Colilli, & M. Danesi (Eds.), Ottawa: Legas, 2000, 103-16.
  Deely, J. (1997) How Is the Universe Perfused with Signs?. In C. W. Spinks & J. N. Deely (Eds.), Semiotics 1997, New York: Peter Lang, 1998, 389-94.
  Deely, J. (1998) Physiosemiosis and Semiotics. In C. W. Spinks & J. N. Deely (Eds.), Semiotics 1998, New York: Peter Lang, 1999, 191-97.
  Deely, J. (1999). Postmodernism and the Perfusion of Signs. In E. Taborsky (Ed.), Semiosis?Evolution?Energy. Toward a reconceptualization of the sign (pp. 7-3). Aachen: Shaker Verlag.
  Deely, J. (2001). Four Ages of Understanding. The first postmodern survey of philosophy from ancient times to the end of the twenty-first century. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  Deely, J. (2001a). Physiosemiosis in the Semiotic Spiral: A Play of Musement, Sign Systems Studies 29.1, 27-6; publication of morning presentation made February 16 at the International Colloquium “The Semiotic Threshold from Nature to Culture-organized by Winfried N?th at the University of Kassel, Wz II, February 16-7, 2001.
  Deely, J. (2004). Dramatic Reading in Three Voices: ‘A Sign Is What?- The American Journal of Semiotics 20.1- (2004), 1-6. See online version http://?www.?youtube.?com/?view_?play_?list??p=?E9651802BCDC14BF-/span> .
  Deely, J. (2006). Let us not lose sight of the forest for the trees - Cybernetics & Human Knowing 13.3- (2006), 161-93. (A commentary response to the review of John Deely’s 2001 Four Ages of Understanding by Frederik Stjernfelt, “Let us not get too far ahead of the story -: A history of realist semiotics?- Cybernetics & Human Knowing 13.1 (2006), 86-03).
  Deely, J. (2009). Aristotle’s Triangle and the Triadic Sign, Prologue to Semiotics 2008. In J. Deely & L. Sbrocchi (Eds.) (Proceedings of the 33rd Annual SSA Meeting held in Houston, Texas, October 16-9, 2008; Ottawa, Canada: Legas), xlix-xc.
  Deely, J. (2009a). To Find Our Way In These Dark Woods-versus Coming Up Short, Recherche Sémiotique/Semiotic Inquiry (RS?·?SI), 26.2- (2006), 57-26.
  Deely, J. (2009b). Augustine & Poinsot. The protosemiotic development, Volume 1 of the “Postmodernity in Philosophy-Poinsot trilogy. Scranton: University o
• 作者单位：John Deely (1)
  
  1. Saint Vincent College, Latrobe, Pennsylvania, USA
  
• 刊物主题：Evolutionary Biology; Linguistics (general); Philosophy of Science; Psychology, general; Computing Methodologies;
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1875-1350

文摘

The notion of “semiotic scaffolding- introduced into the semiotic discussions by Jesper Hoffmeyer in December of 2000, is proving to be one of the single most important concepts for the development of semiotics as we seek to understand the full extent of semiosis and the dependence of evolution, particularly in the living world, thereon. I say “particularly in the living world- because there has been from the first a stubborn resistance among semioticians to seeing how a semiosis prior to and/or independent of living beings is possible. Yet the universe began in a state not only lifeless but incapable of supporting life, and somehow “moved-from there in the direction of being able to sustain life and finally of actually doing so. Wherever dyadic interactions result indirectly in a new condition that either moves the universe closer to being able to sustain life, or moves life itself in the direction not merely of sustaining itself but opening the way to new forms of life, we encounter a “thirdness-in nature of exactly the sort that semiosic triadicity alone can explain. This is the process, both within and without the living world, that requires scaffolding. This essay argues that a fuller understanding of this concept shows why “semiosis-says clearly what “evolution-says obscurely.