Making Science Accessible: A Semiotics of Scientific Communication

This article serves as a demonstration of how certain models of literary analysis, used to theorize and analyze fiction and narrative, can also be applied to scientific communication in such a manner as to promote the accessibility of science to the general public and a greater awareness of the methodology used in making scientific discovery. The approach of this article is based on the assumption that the principles of structuralism and semiotics can provide plausible explanations for the divide between the reception of science and literature. We provide a semiotic analysis of a scientific article that has had significant impact in the field of molecular biology with profound medical implications. Furthermore, we show how the structural and semiotic characteristics of literary texts are also evident in the scientific papers, and we address how these characteristics can be applied to scientific prose in order to propose a model of scientific communication that reaches the public. By applying this theoretical framework to the analysis of both scientific and literary communication, we establish parallels between primary scientific texts and literary prose.     

Semiosis and Bio-Mechanism: towards Consilience

In biosemiotics, some oppose the study of sign relations to empirical work on bio-mechanisms. Urging consilience between these views, we show the value of Alain Berthoz’s concept of simplexity. Its heuristic power is to present molecules, cells, organisms and communities as using tricks to self-fabricate by agglomerating ‘simplex’ bio-mechanisms. Their properties enable living systems (including observers) to self-sustain, adapt and, at best, to thrive. But simplexity also empowers agents to engage with their surroundings in novel ways. Life thus not only generates know-how but also social organisation. With languaging, people can act and inhibit: they can also simplexify. As a result, we can see a fruit as ripe, feel when things are awry or behave in ways likely to be judged to be apt. While all living beings make situated use of the historical and the local, humans also bind these with the use of both practices and artifacts. As a result, brains come to emulate what occurs in-between persons and their surroundings. In pursuing the basis for our powers, we focus on inhibition. This simplex trick enables a plant to use dormancy, a bird to learn, and a person to mesh languaging with other aspects of action/perception. Indeed, inhibition enriches human style phenomenology as impersonal resources are used to expand our epistemic horizons. Experience links a self-fabricating body, ancient bio-mechanisms, community-based concerns and epigenetically derived know-how.     

Three Types of Semiosis

The existence of different types of semiosis has been recognized, so far, in two ways. It has been pointed out that different semiotic features exist in different taxa and this has led to the distinction between zoosemiosis, phytosemiosis, mycosemiosis, bacterial semiosis and the like. Another type of diversity is due to the existence of different types of signs and has led to the distinction between iconic, indexical and symbolic semiosis. In all these cases, however, semiosis has been defined by the Peirce model, i.e., by the idea that the basic structure is a triad of ‘sign, object and interpretant’, and that interpretation is an essential component of semiosis. This model is undoubtedly applicable to animals, since it was precisely the discovery that animals are capable of interpretation that allowed Thomas Sebeok to conclude that they are also capable of semiosis. Unfortunately, however, it is not clear how far the Peirce model can be extended beyond the animal kingdom, and we already know that we cannot apply it to the cell. The rules of the genetic code have been virtually the same in all living systems and in all environments ever since the origin of life, which clearly shows that they do not depend on interpretation. Luckily, it has been pointed out that semiosis is not necessarily based on interpretation and can be defined exclusively in terms of coding. According to the ‘code model’, a semiotic system is made of signs, meanings and coding rules, all produced by the same codemaker, and in this form it is immediately applicable to the cell. The code model, furthermore, allows us to recognize the existence of many organic codes in living systems, and to divide them into two main types that here are referred to as manufacturing semiosis and signalling semiosis. The genetic code and the splicing codes, for example, take part in processes that actually manufacture biological objects, whereas signal transduction codes and compartment codes organize existing objects into functioning supramolecular structures. The organic codes of single cells appeared in the first three billion years of the history of life and were involved either in manufacturing semiosis or in signalling semiosis. With the origin of animals, however, a third type of semiosis came into being, a type that can be referred to as interpretive semiosis because it became closely involved with interpretation. We realize in this way that the contribution of semiosis to life was far greater than that predicted by the Peirce model, where semiosis is always a means of interpreting the world. Life is essentially about three things: (1) it is about manufacturing objects, (2) it is about organizing objects into functioning systems, and (3) it is about interpreting the world. The idea that these are all semiotic processes, tells us that life depends on semiosis much more deeply and extensively than we thought. We realize in this way that there are three distinct types of semiosis in Nature, and that they gave very different contributions to the origin and the evolution of life.     

Community through Culture: From Insects to Whales

It has become increasingly clear that social learning and culture occur much more broadly, and in a wider variety of animal communities, than initially believed. Recent research has expanded the list to include insects, fishes, elephants, and cetaceans. Such diversity allows scientists to expand the scope of potential research questions, which can help form a more complete understanding of animal culture than any single species can provide on its own. It is crucial to understand how culture and social learning present in different communities, as well as what influences community structure and culture may have on one another, so that the results across these different studies may most effectively inform one another. This review presents an overview of social learning in species across a spectrum of community structures, providing the necessary infrastructure to allow a comparison of studies that will help move the field of animal culture forward.     

Multi-Level Semiosis: a Paradigm of Emergent Innovation

In this introductory article to the special issue on Multi-level semiosis we attempt to stage the background for qualifying the notion of “multi-levelness” when considering communication processes and semiosis in all life forms, i.e. from the cellular to the organismic level. While structures are organized hierarchically, communication processes require a kind of processual organization that may be better described as being heterarchical. Theoretically, the challenge arises in the temporal domain, that is, in the developmental and evolutionary dimension of dynamic semiotic processes. We discuss the importance of this fundamental difference in order to explain how levels, domains and orders of magnitude, on the one hand, and synchronic and diachronic processes, on the other, contribute to the overall organization of every living being. To account for such multi-level organization, semiotic freedom is assumed to be a scalar property that endows living systems at different levels and domains with the capacity to ponder selectively the overall structural coherence and functional compatibility of their heterarchical processing, which is increasingly less conditioned by the underlying molecular determinism.     

The Semiotics of Culture and the Concept of a Text

Two tendencies are ascertainable in the development of semiotics over the past 15 years. One has been toward refinement of the initial concepts and definition of procedures of generation. The striving for precise modeling procedures has led to the creation of metasemiotics: the object of study becomes not texts as such, but models of texts, models of models, etc. The second tendency concentrates its attention on the semiotic functioning of a real text. Whereas in the first case contradiction, structural inconsistency, the accommodation of differently structured texts within single textual formation, and semantic indeterminacy are random and nonfunctional attributes that can be removed at the metalevel of text modeling, from the second standpoint they are the object of special attention. Using Saussurean terminology, we might say that in the first case it is langage that interests the investigator as a materialization of the structural laws of a langue; in the second case it is those semiotic aspects of a text that diverge from the linguistic structure that are the object of attention. Whereas the first tendency is materialized in metasemiotics, the second by nature gives birth to the semiotics of culture.     

Interactive Bodies: The Semiosis of Architectural Forms

In this paper architectural forms are presented as symbolic forms issued from the complex semiosis that characterises human cognition (Ferreira (2007, 2010)). Being semiotic objects, these symbolic forms are, consequently, context- dependent_they emerge and have meaning, i.e., they are assigned a functional and/or aesthetic value, in particular physical, social and cultural frameworks. As it happens with all semiotic objects, architectural forms, whatever their nature, are not static but highly interactive. In fact, they act as agents of specific semiotic processes, engaged in a permanent dialectic relationship with the environment they are embedded in. From this dialectics important physical, social, cultural and economic changes frequently arise, redefining this way the original framework for decades to come. As Pallasmaa (2009) points out: “Architecture is existentially rooted, and it expresses fundamental existential experiences, the complex condensation of how it feels to be human being in this world. Architecture grounds and frames existence and creates specific horizons of perception, understanding and identity.” Architecture happens in the context of particular landscapes both natural and man-made, individuating spaces, assigning them an identity, turning the frequently undifferentiated physical environment into “locus”, “place”, “site”, “ort”, definitely contributing to the definition of the mental map that individual minds are able to share collectively. The fundamental role played by architectural forms in the definition of “place” and identity and in the shaping or reshaping of a physical, social and cultural environment is analysed in this paper through a case study that observes the consequences of this dynamics in the development of the social and cultural tissue of a particular city.     

From Indians to Chicanos: The Dynamics of Mexican-American Culture

From Indians to Chicanos: The Dynamics of Mexican- American Culture. Second Edition. James Diego Vigil. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1998. 324 pp.     

From Indians to Chicanos: The Dynamics of Mexican-American Culture

From Indians to Chicanos: The Dynamics of Mexican-American Culture. 2nd edition. James Diego Vigil. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1998. 324 pp.     

Semiosis as Individuation: Integration of Multiple Orders of Magnitude

This paper proposes Gilbert Simondon’s ontogenetic theory of individuation as an overarching framework for multilevel semiosis. What renders this theory suitable for this role is the fact that it shares a significant part of its heritage with biosemiotics, which provides compatibility between them. Unlike many philosophers who have worked on individuation, Simondon envisages a general process of individuation that starts with a metastable preindividual. This process ultimately constitutes an axiomatisation of ontogenesis and manifests itself in three basic modes: physical, vital and psycho-collective. In any of these modes a transductive operation is at work resolving the disparities of the preindividual whereby new structures emerge. Depending on the mode of individuation, the emerging structures can create new disparities that ask for further individuation. Simondon refers to such conversion of structure to operation and vice versa as allagmatics. He also extends his theory to scientific methodology establishing a healthy balance between reductionism and holism. His theory can be used to amend Peircean metaphysics to improve its compatibility with contemporary scientific discourse.     

Burnout: From Popular Culture to Psychiatric Diagnosis in Sweden

This article aims to understand how burn-out became an object of thought, through the study of certain processes of legitimization. It traces the genealogy of the burn-out concept from the initial article from 1974, via its confirmation as a “disease” in the 1980s, to its appearance as a legitimate diagnosis in Sweden in 1997. The theoretical framework is that of applied metaphysics, which means a study on how a specific phenomenon came into being. Consequently, I take departure from ontology in motion with an approach that concerns the legitimization processes. The conclusion will show the underlying processes of legitimization in relation to the making of a psychiatric object of thought in Swedish society.     

Synergy of Energy and Semiosis: Cooperation Climbs the Tree of Life

The course of biological evolution is regarded by many authors as an ascending path toward higher levels of variety, complexity and integration. There are similar but partly conflicting accounts of the nature and causes of this ascending course. With the aim of reaching a unified conception I start by summarily reviewing three notable examples. These are, in their latest presentations, those of Hoffmeyer and Stjernfelt 2015, Szathmáry 2015, and Lane 2015a. Comparison of their commonalities and divergences, combined with further reflections, leads to the following views: 1) cooperation (synergy) between preexistent traits and processes is the primary determinant in the emergence of evolutionary novelty; 2) cooperation is a triadic relation similar to semiosis (while semiosis is a particular form of cooperation); 3) regulation, the key element of both metabolism and replication, results from the cooperation of energetic and semiotic causation; 4) conceptual generalization (as in scientific reasoning) and concrete generalization (as in biological evolution) are fruits of cooperation. Conceptual generalizations spring from the cooperation of ideas. I believe these realizations supply essential elements for a unified view of the ascent of biological evolution towards higher levels of organization. Some of these conceptions are also applicable to similar ascending trajectories through the stages of cultural and technological evolution.     

On the Generification of Culture: From Blow Fish to Melanesian

We extend Wilk's discussion of how more powerful people can set the dimensions of common understanding through which socio-cultural groups communicate and contest. Focusing on one group in pluralistic Papua New Guinea, we demonstrate that, in setting these dimensions, representatives of the state and emissaries of global capitalism have been gaining control over culturally specific forms of knowledge. Through analysis of three events, we show that the Chambri have been losing control over their local knowledge as it has been rendered understandable to others. In effect, becoming understandable –'legible', in Scott's apt phrase – has entailed 'cultural generification' such that the cultural particular either has become translated into the cultural general or into a general example of the cultural particular. In either case, through such generification, local knowledge and knowledge-makers have become not only comprehensible to, but also controllable by, outsiders.