A necessary condition for proof of abiotic semiosis

Semiotica 2013 (197):283-287 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This short essay seeks to identify and prevent a pitfall that attends less careful inquiries into “physiosemiosis.” It is emphasized that, in order to truly establish the presence of sign-action in the non-living world, all the components of a triadic sign - including the interpretant - would have to be abiotic (that is, not dependent on a living organism). Failure to heed this necessary condition can lead one to hastily confuse a natural sign (like smoke coming from fire) for an instance of abiotic semiosis. A more rigorous and reserved approach to the topic is called for.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-18

Downloads
441 (#65,957)

6 months
120 (#45,377)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Marc Champagne
Kwantlen Polytechnic University

References found in this work

Philosophy and Scientific Realism.J. J. C. Smart - 1965\ - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 15 (60):358-360.
Rainforest realism: A Dennettian theory of existence.D. Ross - 2000 - In Don Ross, Andrew Brook & David Thompson (eds.), Dennett’s Philosophy: A Comprehensive Assessment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. pp. 147-168.
Physiosemiosis in the semiotic spiral.John Deely - 2001 - Sign Systems Studies 29 (1):27-47.
A Note on M. Barbieri’s “Scientific Biosemiotics”.Marc Champagne - 2009 - American Journal of Semiotics 25 (1-2):155-161.

View all 7 references / Add more references