Увійти

Готові списки джерел за темами / Biosemiotic / Статті в журналах

Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Biosemiotic.

Статті в журналах з теми "Biosemiotic"

Автор: Grafiati

Опубліковано: 11 березня 2023

Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями

Оберіть тип джерела:

Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Biosemiotic".

Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.

Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.

Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.

1

Favareau, Donald. "Founding a world biosemiotics institution: The International Society for Biosemiotic Studies." Sign Systems Studies 33, no. 2 (December 31, 2005): 481–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2005.33.2.12.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

2

Tønnessen, Morten, Jonathan Beever, and Yogi Hale Hendlin. "Introducing Biosemiotic Ethics." Zeitschrift für Semiotik 37, no. 3-4 (August 3, 2018): 3–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.14464/zsem.v37i3-4.362.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this introduction to the special issue on Biosemiotic Ethics, we introduce major concepts and themes corresponding to the topic. With reference to Ivar Puura’s notion of “semiocide”, we ask: what are the ethical responsibilities that attention to semiotics carries? We argue that if life is fundamentally semiotic, then biosemiotics and moral theory should be explored in conjunction, rather than separately. Biosemiotic ethics becomes relevant whenever one complex of signs impinges on another; particularly whenever human sign usage impinges on the wellbeing or sustainable functioning of human or non-human semiotic agents. Stable coexistence of sign systems is far from inevitable, but it is a meaningful goal that can be pursued. In complex ecosystems, for example, certain types of coexistent relationships have evolved to share space despite competitive needs and expressions. We describe the ways in which authors in this volume articulate various justifications for the view that what is morally relevant is semiosis. Given these perspectives in a growing approach to understanding moral relationships, biosemiotic ethics has the decisive advantage of drawing on contemporary biosemiotics’ empirically-informed biological acuity within a rich semiotic framework.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

3

Weber, Andreas. "Mimesis and Metaphor: The biosemiotic generation of meaning in Cassirer and Uexküll." Sign Systems Studies 32, no. 1/2 (December 31, 2004): 297–307. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2004.32.1-2.13.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this paper I pursue the influences of Jakob von Uexküll’s biosemiotics on the anthropology of Ernst Cassirer. I propose that Cassirer in his Philosophy of the Symbolic Forms has written a cultural semiotics which in certain core ideas is grounded on biosemiotic presuppositions, some explicit (as the “emotive basic ground” of experience), some more implicit. I try to trace the connecting lines to a biosemiotic approach with the goal of formulating a comprehensive semiotic anthropology which understands man as embodied being and culture as a phenomenon of general semioses.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

4

Chávez Barreto, Eugenio Israel, Oscar S. Miyamoto Gómez, Tyler James Bennett, Ľudmila Lacková, and Kalevi Kull. "Funktionskreis and the biosemiotic signifieds: Towards the integration of semiotics." Sign Systems Studies 50, no. 2-3 (December 5, 2022): 433–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2022.50.2-3.07.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

The following is a brief synopsis of the 2021 summer Semiosalong event titled “Funktionskreis and the biosemiotic signifieds”, held at the Karl Ernst von Baer House, Tartu, Estonia, with presentations by the authors of this review. The included talks revolve around the idea of a ‘second major turn in biosemiotics’ following the more ‘Peircean inspired biology’ turn of the last few decades of the 20th century, and reconciling its findings with other theoretical foundations of general semiotics, such as structural semiology. The aesthetic and textual concerns of the latter invite commentary from the biosemiotic perspective.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

5

Deely, John. "Ethics and the Semiosis-Semiotics Distinction." Zeitschrift für Semiotik 37, no. 3-4 (August 3, 2018): 13–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.14464/zsem.v37i3-4.364.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This essay focuses on the turn to ethics within biosemiotics and rearticulates the difference between semiosis and semiotics in order to orient biosemiotic ethics to the fundamental importance of human responsibility in and to the semiosphere.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

6

Beever, Jonathan, Morten Tønnessen, Yogi Hale Hendlin, and Wendy Wheeler. "Interview on biosemiotic ethics with Wendy Wheeler." Zeitschrift für Semiotik 37, no. 3-4 (August 3, 2018): 177–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.14464/zsem.v37i3-4.386.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this interview, Wendy Wheeler, London Metropolitan University Emerita Professor of English Literature and Cultural Inquiry, discusses her thoughts on biosemiotics and its relevance for ethics. In Wheeler’s perspective, biosemiotics can ground ethics because it offers an alternative and fitting ontology of relations. She shares her thoughts on Peirce as a foundational figure for biosemiotics, and explains why she doubts that an ecological ethics can be framed in terms of laws. Further, she discusses her views on moral agency in nonhumans, and warns against ideas based on human exceptionalism, sentimentalism and puritanism. Wheeler thinks that a biosemiotic ethics can posit a more located, or systemically nested, sense of semiotic value. Her moral question, she explains, would always be something like: Is this growing? Is this lively?

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

7

Emmeche, Claus. "The chicken and the Orphean egg: On the function of meaning and the meaning of function." Sign Systems Studies 30, no. 1 (December 31, 2002): 15–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2002.30.1.02.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

A central aspect of the relation between biosemiotics and biology is investigated by asking: Is a biological concept of function intrinsically related to a biosemiotic concept of sign action, and vice versa? A biological notion of function (as some process or part that serves some purpose in the context of maintenance and reproduction of the whole organism) is discussed in the light of the attempt to provide an understanding of life processes as being of a semiotic nature, i.e., constituted by sign actions. Does signification and communication in biology (e.g., intracellular communication) always presuppose an organism with distinct semiotic or quasi-semiotic functions? And, symmetrically, is it the case that functional relations are simply not conceivable without living sign action? The present note is just an introduction to a project aiming at elucidating the relations between biofunction and biosemiosis.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

8

Pattee, Howard H., and Kalevi Kull. "A biosemiotic conversation: Between physics and semiotics." Sign Systems Studies 37, no. 1/2 (December 15, 2009): 311–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2009.37.1-2.12.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this dialogue, we discuss the contrast between inexorable physical laws and the semiotic freedom of life. We agree that material and symbolic structures require complementary descriptions, as do the many hierarchical levels of their organizations. We try to clarify our concepts of laws, constraints, rules, symbols, memory, interpreters, and semiotic control. We briefly describe our different personal backgrounds that led us to a biosemiotic approach, and we speculate on the future directions of biosemiotics.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

9

Kull, Kalevi, Claus Emmeche, and Donald Favareau. "Biosemiotic Questions." Biosemiotics 1, no. 1 (March 26, 2008): 41–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-008-9008-2.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

10

Winter, Sarah. "Darwin's Saussure: Biosemiotics and Race in Expression." Representations 107, no. 1 (2009): 128–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/rep.2009.107.1.128.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Charles Darwin's The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872) theorizes expressions as biological signs based on the physiological signifier's arbitrary nature as an outcome of natural selection. Darwin's biosemiotic thinking in advance of Saussurian linguistics produces a correlated reading of race as a biologically incoherent sign. While Darwin's methodological modernism remains implicit in his writings, the Darwinian biosemiotics that emerges in Expression offers a promising means to bridge the natural and human sciences.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

11

Weber, Andreas. "Feeling the signs: The origins of meaning in the biological philosophy of Susanne K. Langer and Hans Jonas." Sign Systems Studies 30, no. 1 (December 31, 2002): 183–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2002.30.1.11.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This paper describes the semiotic approach to organism in two proto-biosemiotic thinkers, Susanne K. Langer and Hans Jonas. Both authors develop ideas that have become central terms of biosemiotics: the organism as subject, the realisation of the living as a closed circular self, the value concept, and, in the case of Langer, the concept of symbol. Langer tries to develop a theory of cultural symbolism based on a theory of organism as a self-realising entity creating meaning and value. This paper deals mainly with what both authors independently call “feeling”. Both authors describe “feeling” as a value-based perspective, established as a result of the active self interest manifested by an organic system. The findings of Jonas and Langer show the generation of a subject pole, or biosemiotic agent, under a more precise accent, as e.g. Uexküll does. Their ideas can also be affiliated to the interpretation of autopoiesis given by the late Francisco Varela (embodied cognition or “enactivism”). A synthesis of these positions might lead to insights how symbolic expression arises from biological conditions of living.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

12

Augustyn, Prisca. "Translating Jakob von Uexküll — Reframing Umweltlehre as biosemiotics." Sign Systems Studies 37, no. 1/2 (December 15, 2009): 281–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2009.37.1-2.10.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Thomas Sebeok attributed it to what he called the ‘wretched’ translation of Uexküll’s Theoretische Biologie (1920) that the notion of Umwelt did not reach the Anglo-American intellectual community much earlier. There is no doubt that making more of Uexküll’s Umweltlehre available in English will not only further the biosemiotic movement, but also fill a gap in the foundational theoretical canon of semiotics in general. The purpose of this paper is to address issues of terminology and theory translation between Uexküll’s Umweltlehre and current biosemiotics.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

13

Olteanu, Alin. "Multimodal Modeling: Bridging Biosemiotics and Social Semiotics." Biosemiotics 14, no. 3 (November 18, 2021): 783–805. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-021-09463-7.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

AbstractThis paper explores a semiotic notion of body as starting point for bridging biosemiotic with social semiotic theory. The cornerstone of the argument is that the social semiotic criticism of the classic view of meaning as double articulation can support the criticism of language-centrism that lies at the foundation of biosemiotics. Besides the pragmatic epistemological advantages implicit in a theoretical synthesis, I argue that this brings a semiotic contribution to philosophy of mind broadly. Also, it contributes to overcoming the polemic in linguistics between, loosely put, cognitive universalism and cultural relativism. This possibility is revealed by the recent convergence of various semiotic theories towards a criticism of the classic notion of meaning as double articulation. In biosemiotics, the interest to explicate meaning as multiply articulated stems from the construal of Umwelt as relying on the variety of sense perception channels and semiotic systems that a species has at its disposal. Recently, social semiotics developed an unexplored interest for embodiment by starting from the other end, namely the consideration of the modal heterogeneity of meaning. To bridge these notions, I employ the cognitive semantic notion of embodiment and Mittelberg’s cognitive semiotic notion of exbodiment. In light of these, I explore the possible intricacies between the biosemiotic notion of primary modeling system and concepts referring to preconceptual structures for knowledge organization stemming from cognitive linguistics. Further, Mittelberg’s concept of exbodiment allows for a construal of meaning articulation as mediation between the exbodying and embodying directions of mind.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

14

Bonamin, Leoni Villano. "Biosemiotics and Body Signifier Theory: a way to understand High Dilutions." International Journal of High Dilution Research - ISSN 1982-6206 10, no. 35 (December 23, 2021): 66. http://dx.doi.org/10.51910/ijhdr.v10i35.448.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Since the 80Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â´s Madeleine Bastide and AgnÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¨s Lagache have worked on the idea of the Body Signifier Theory, in which the living systems could be defined as ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…â€œsensibleÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Â systems not only able to self-organize, but also to receive and process non-molecular information according to the Pierce semiotic triad: matrix, receiver and carrier. These ideas were built along 20 years of experimental observations, whose results presented some kind of stereotyped pattern that emerged from cells or animals exposed to high dilutions, according to the similia principle. Curiously, at the same time, classical scientific communities have developed the concept of biosemiotics after the observation that living systems are semiotics entities able to deal with codes and meanings, even in molecule-driven processes. Not only the genetic code, but all regulatory functions in living systems represent coding processes. The development of methodologies to identify and understand these codes and its outputs is the aim of biosemiotic science. Putting both concepts together (body signifiers and biosemiotics), it is possible to recognize strong similarities between their approaches and methodology, allowing logical connections between non-molecular signals and changes in cell interactions patterns. Thus, the general concept of biosemiotic could be a theoretical platform on which the construction of a solid phenomenological description of high dilutions effects could be done.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

15

Favareau, Donald. "The Biosemiotic Turn." Biosemiotics 1, no. 1 (February 20, 2008): 5–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-008-9010-8.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

16

Lestel, Dominique. "The Biosemiotics and Phylogenesis of Culture." Social Science Information 41, no. 1 (March 2002): 35–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0539018402041001003.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

The question of animal cultures has once again become a subject of debate in ethology, and is now one of its most active and problematic areas. One surprising feature of this research, however, is the lack of attention paid to the communications that go on in these complex animal societies, with the exception of mechanisms of social learning. This neglect of communications is all the more troubling because many ethologists are unwilling to acknowledge that animals have cultures precisely because they do not possess language, a refusal therefore on semiotic grounds. In the present article, I show that the biosemiotic approach to animal cultures is, on the contrary, essential to their understanding, even if the complexity of animal communications is far from being well enough understood. I consider that some of the consequences of this approach are very important, in particular the question of whether we can talk about subjects in the case of animals. Alternatively, I suggest that the semiotic approach to animal cultures leads to a discussion of some of the most serious limitations of biosemiotics, particularly when it comes to investigating the status of the interlocutors in a social community, or to taking into account interspecific communications and the social dimension of any biosemiotic interaction - which biosemiotics has for the moment failed to do. Finally I call attention to the importance of animals living in human communities and suggest that this be studied so as to better apprehend the capacities for culture in non-human living organisms.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

17

Puumeister, Ott, and Andreas Ventsel. "Biopolitics Meets Biosemiotics: The Semiotic Thresholds of Anti-Aging Interventions." Theory, Culture & Society 35, no. 1 (January 25, 2017): 117–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276416687375.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Biosemiotics and the analysis of biopower have not yet been explicitly brought together. This article attempts to find their connecting points from the perspective of biosemiotics. It uses the biosemiotic understanding of the different types of semiosis in order to approach the practices of biopower and biopolitics. The central concept of the paper is that of the ‘semiotic threshold’. We can speak of (1) the lower semiotic threshold, signifying the dividing line between non-semiosis and semiosis; and (2) the secondary semiotic thresholds, signifying the borders between different types (iconic, indexical, symbolic) of semiosis. Speaking in terms of types of semiosis means speaking in terms of different capabilities for normativity, which is why the article uses the approaches of Michel Foucault on normalization in biopower and of Georges Canguilhem on organismic normativity. As an example on which biopolitics and biosemiotics could connect, the discourse of regenerative and anti-aging medicine is used.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

18

Orsucci, Franco. "Human Synchronization Maps—The Hybrid Consciousness of the Embodied Mind." Entropy 23, no. 12 (November 25, 2021): 1569. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e23121569.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

We examine the theoretical implications of empirical studies developed over recent years. These experiments have explored the biosemiotic nature of communication streams from emotional neuroscience and embodied mind perspectives. Information combinatorics analysis enabled a deeper understanding of the coupling and decoupling dynamics of biosemiotics streams. We investigated intraindividual and interpersonal relations as coevolution dynamics of hybrid couplings, synchronizations, and desynchronizations. Cluster analysis and Markov chains produced evidence of chimaera states and phase transitions. A probabilistic and nondeterministic approach clarified the properties of these hybrid dynamics. Thus, multidimensional theoretical models can represent the hybrid nature of human interactions.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

19

Rodríguez H., Claudio J. "Against Universalism in Biosemiotic Theories." Linguistic Frontiers 3, no. 1 (June 1, 2020): 48–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/lf-2020-0005.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

AbstractThe frontiers of biosemiotics are inconspicuously blurry. This is a feature and not a bug of the discipline in that it allows us to ask questions beyond certain boundaries, enriching both our knowledge beyond semiotic theories and the possibility of covering new ground through them. Yet, explanatory power should be something of a concern for biosemioticians looking to plant flags around different heights. The paths cleared by backwoodsmen should hold up to scrutiny, and in order for biosemioticians to examine these paths, some of the features of semiotic theory should work as reminders of what the aim of semiotic theory is.This paper will explore one particular issue when it comes to building biosemiotic theories, namely, the idea that the semiotic comprises a universal and basal quality in a hierarchy of elements assumed to give rise to other, more complex things. The metatheoretical problem at its core will be defined as the unnecessary expansion of semiotic attributes in order to give them enough explanatory power to either provide semiotic theories of everything or give a semiotic basis to theories that do not, in principle, require it.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

20

Doronina, Svetlana G. "Biosemiotic Approaches in Cultural Studies: General and Specific." Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences 65, no. 3 (September 16, 2022): 90–111. http://dx.doi.org/10.30727/0235-1188-2022-65-3-90-111.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

The article explicates new conceptual approaches to the study of culture, language, semantic, and communicative processes, focusing on the importance of the role of the natural environment and various living systems in cultural semiosis. The author substantiates the relevance of the main biosemiotic approaches in the study of sign systems of culture and the problems of semiosis, and also determines their specificity, main problems and prospects for use. The author explicates the biological roots of sign formation and meaning, establishes the main mechanisms for their formation, draws attention to similarities, rather than differences, in the manifestations of culture and the natural world, reveals the local contexts of the functioning of the process of semiosis, which are related to the interests of living organisms, their interactions with the environment. The article considers the possibility of using biosemiotics as an interdisciplinary basis that unites the natural and human sciences in the field of studying semiotic processes, identifies the main obstacles to the development of this direction. The perspective of the research proposed in the article allows us to talk about new prospects for the use of biosemiotic approaches in the study of culture and society, taking into account the influence of the natural environment and living systems on the process of sign formation. It also makes it possible to establish the integrative and explanatory functions of biosemiotic positions associated with the unification of the biological and sociocultural aspects of semiosis. The results of the study may be important for the development of modern cognitive sciences and non-classical epistemology, focused on the study of various forms of cognition, for the search for ecological methods and approaches to the study of sign systems of culture, for the creation of new hybrid methods and models for the study of semiotic systems, for the solution of a number of epistemological and metaphysical issues that require philosophical reflection.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

21

Weible, Davide. "The Concept of Exaptation Between Biology and Semiotics." International Journal of Signs and Semiotic Systems 2, no. 1 (January 2012): 72–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijsss.2012010103.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This paper explains what the biological concept of exaptation is by providing the theoretical context within which it was formulated and the definition of its meaning with respect to other related notions adopted in evolutionary biology. At the same time, this paper describes the main stages of its further development from the initial introduction and outlines its wide contemporary usage within fields of research other than biology. Finally, specific attention is paid to the linguistic, semiotic and biosemiotic dimensions of its adoption, concluding with a discussion concerning the relationship between exaptation and biosemiotics and furnishing some clues for a possible direction of inquiry in the tradition of a Peircean semiotic approach.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

22

Weber, Bruce H. "Embracing the Biosemiotic Perspective." Biosemiotics 2, no. 3 (October 17, 2009): 367–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-009-9065-1.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

23

Tønnessen, Morten, Alexei Sharov, and Timo Maran. "Jesper Hoffmeyer’s Biosemiotic Legacy." Biosemiotics 12, no. 3 (November 22, 2019): 357–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-019-09369-5.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

24

Askenasy, Jean Jacques. "Biosemiotic conflict in communication." Pragmatics and Cognition 23, no. 3 (December 31, 2016): 364–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pc.23.3.02ask.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Y. Michael Barilan have described the conflictual aspects of human communication (Merleau-Ponty, 1967). Humans communicate through verbal language, body-language, and stereotypes. (I coined the term ‘phatic communication’ for stereotypes.) These 3 types of communication can be in harmony or conflict. Verbal (VC) and corporal (CC) communication are well known. During the past decade, I have examined the field of phatic communication (PC). Phatic communication consists of laughing, crying, yawning, sighing, gasping, sneezing and hiccupping, actions that date back over 500 million years to the Reptilia class of the animal kingdom. During the last million years, these biosemiotic actions have acquired psychological meanings in humans as a result of neocortex connections. The simultaneous presence of threatening verbal signs with empathic stereotype signs, such as violence with laughter or aggression with a smile, requires a rational / emotional effort to decide within milliseconds if the message is a threat or joke.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

25

Witzany, Günther. "Plant Communication from Biosemiotic Perspective." Plant Signaling & Behavior 1, no. 4 (July 2006): 169–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.4161/psb.1.4.3163.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

26

Giorgi, F. "Consciousness in the biosemiotic perspective." International Journal of Psychophysiology 85, no. 3 (September 2012): 331–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2012.06.115.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

27

Ferreira, Maria Isabel Aldinhas. "On Meaning: A Biosemiotic Approach." Biosemiotics 3, no. 1 (January 19, 2010): 107–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-009-9068-y.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

28

Goldberg, Louis J., and Liz Stillwaggon Swan. "A Biosemiotic Analysis of Braille." Biosemiotics 4, no. 1 (July 23, 2010): 25–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-010-9092-y.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

29

Tønnessen, Morten, Riin Magnus, and Carlo Brentari. "The Biosemiotic Glossary Project: Umwelt." Biosemiotics 9, no. 1 (March 15, 2016): 129–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-016-9255-6.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

30

Favareau, Donald, and Arran Gare. "The Biosemiotic Glossary Project: Intentionality." Biosemiotics 10, no. 3 (December 2017): 413–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-017-9309-4.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

31

Chebanov, Sergey V., and Anton Markoš. "A text on biosemiotic themes." Sign Systems Studies 37, no. 1/2 (December 15, 2009): 332–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2009.37.1-2.13.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

What follows is a two-part review of Günther Witzany’s two-part book, The Logos of the Bios (2006, 2007). The first part of the review is written by Sergey Chebanov, and it approaches the text as a source of ideas on biosemiotics and biohermeneutics. The second part is written by Anton Markoš, and it estimates the biological pithiness of the book and the correctness of the reflection of the included data of modern biology.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

32

Oller, John. "Biosemiotic Entropy: Concluding the Series." Entropy 16, no. 7 (July 18, 2014): 4060–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e16074060.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

33

Herrmann-Pillath, Carsten. "Biosemiotic Foundations of a Darwinian Approach to Cultural Evolution." Cultural Science Journal 13, no. 1 (December 1, 2021): 16–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/csj-2021-0002.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Abstract The present paper reflects on the state of evolutionary approaches to culture, which are mostly seen as essential for defining ‘cultural science’. They manifest two flaws that still block a productive synthesis between the sciences and the humanities. First, they employ an inflationary generic concept of culture that covers all information that is stored and transmitted non-genetically; this differs from the narrower uses in the humanities that focus on the diversity of cultures and their interactions. Second, they approach culture as observable and measurable ‘traits’, hence do not develop a precise concept of cultural meaning, which must take account of the fundamental property of reflexivity in human cognition. I propose an alternative view that is grounded in biosemiotic analysis of the brain, and that I relate to Robert Aunger’s conception of ‘neuromemetics’. I already contributed this idea to the first-stage debates about cultural science after 2008. The current paper adds much analytical detail on the systemic nature of cultural semiosis operating in a selectionist logic of brain dynamics, as theorized early on by F. A. von Hayek. I suggest that the bridge between the sciences and the humanities must be built via new disciplines in the neurosciences, such as cultural neuroscience, which avoids both biological reductionism and a mere analogical deployment of evolutionary diffusion analysis in the new field of cultural science. Semiotics is the overarching paradigm of integration, in the distinct versions of both biosemiotics and physiosemiotics. I suggest combining Peircean biosemiotics with Lotman’s concept of the ‘semiosphere’. In this context, culture is defined by reflexive operations that occur over internal boundaries of the semiosphere that are constitutive of the identity of the agent as the physical locus of neuromeme evolution.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

34

Colaguori, Robert, and Marcel Danesi. "Medical Semiotics." International Journal of Semiotics and Visual Rhetoric 1, no. 1 (January 2017): 11–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijsvr.2017010102.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Medical semiotics, as a branch of general semiotics, has never really gained a firm foothold in either semiotics itself or medical science. Despite the fact that the discipline of semiotics traces its roots to the medical domain in the ancient world, it has been largely relegated to the margins, with several key exceptions starting with Jakob von Uexküll and more recently Thomas A. Sebeok and the biosemiotic movement. However, there is no evidence that it is a significant and growing autonomous area of research either within biosemiotics or medical practice. The purpose of this paper is to revive interest in medical semiotics examining at the historical principles that would make it highly relevant today in the global village where conceptions of disease and health are in constant flux.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

35

Anderson, Myrdene. "Rothschild’s ouroborus." Sign Systems Studies 31, no. 1 (December 31, 2003): 301–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2003.31.1.14.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

36

Kull, Kalevi. "Alexandr Levich (1945–2016) and the Tartu–Moscow Biosemiotic Nexus." Sign Systems Studies 44, no. 1/2 (July 5, 2016): 255–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2016.44.1-2.16.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

37

Emmeche, Claus. "A biosemiotic note on organisms, animals, machines, cyborgs, and the quasi-autonomy of robots." Mechanicism and Autonomy: What Can Robotics Teach Us About Human Cognition and Action? 15, no. 3 (December 13, 2007): 455–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pc.15.3.06emm.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

It is argued in this paper that robots are just quasi-autonomous beings, which must be understood, within an emergent systems view, as intrinsically linked to and presupposing human beings as societal creatures within a technologically mediated world. Biosemiotics is introduced as a perspective on living systems that is based upon contemporary biology but reinterpreted through a qualitative organicist tradition in biology. This allows for emphasizing the differences between (1) an organism as a general semiotic system with vegetative and self-reproductive capacities, (2) an animal body also with sentience and phenomenal states, and (3) higher forms of anthroposemiotic systems such as humans, machines and robots. On all three levels, representations (or sign action) are crucial processes. The “representationalism” invoked by critiques of cognitive science and robotics tends to focus only on simplistic notions of representation, and must be distinguished from a Peircean or biosemiotic notion of representation. Implications for theorizing about the physical, biological, animate, phenomenal and social body and their forms of autonomy are discussed.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

38

Beever, Jonathan, and Morten Tønnessen. "Justifying Moral Standing by Biosemiotic Particularism." Zeitschrift für Semiotik 37, no. 3-4 (August 3, 2018): 31–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.14464/zsem.v37i3-4.366.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this essay we examine a fundamental question in biosemiotic ethics: why think that semiosis is a morally relevant property, or a property that supports the moral value of living beings or systems that possess it? We argue that biosemiotic particularism, the view that normative assessment should be based on the particular fulfillment of an organism’s or other biological entity’s specific semiosic capacity, offers a justifiable normative position for the biosemiotic ethicist. If what justifies offering moral standing to all living beings and systems is that these entities are semiosic, then there must be something ethically motivating about semiosis. We examine several arguments in answer to this question. These include arguments for semiotic agency, the claim that all living entities are agential as a result of their semiosic capacities; arguments for subjective or quasi-subjective experience, that all living beings have it and that it matters morally; and arguments for the moral relevance of meaning-making as sufficient for moral considerability. We also address the negative argument that semiosis is at least as defensible as sentience, an alternative candidate capacity for grounding moral relevance, and other cognition-related capacities. Finally, we push further to ask: even if semiosis is a morally relevant capacity of living organisms, is it the morally relevant property? That is, is semiosis the least common denominator for attribution of moral worth, to the effect that sentience-based approaches, among others, could build on biosemiotic ethics as a foundational meta-ethical theory?

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

39

Kull, Kalevi. "On the history of joining bio with semio: F.S.Rothschild and the biosemiotic rules." Sign Systems Studies 27 (December 31, 1999): 128–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.1999.27.06.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

40

Emmeche, Claus. "The emergence of signs of living feeling: Reverberations from the first Gartherings in Biosemiotics." Sign Systems Studies 29, no. 1 (December 31, 2001): 369–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2001.29.1.24.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

41

Mäekivi, Nelly, and Timo Maran. "Semiotic dimensions of human attitudes towards other animals: A case of zoological gardens." Sign Systems Studies 44, no. 1/2 (July 5, 2016): 209–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/sss.2016.44.1-2.12.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This paper analyses the cultural and biosemiotic bases of human attitudes towards other species. A critical stance is taken towards species neutrality and it is shown that human attitudes towards different animal species differ depending on the psychological dispositions of the people, biosemiotic conditions (e.g. umwelt stuctures), cultural connotations and symbolic meanings. In real-life environments, such as zoological gardens, both biosemiotic and cultural aspects influence which animals are chosen for display, as well as the various ways in which they are displayed and interpreted. These semiotic dispositions are further used as motifs in staging, personifying or de-personifying animals in order to modify visitors’ perceptions and attitudes. As a case study, the contrasting interpretations of culling a giraffe at the Copenhagen zoo are discussed. The communicative encounters and shifting per ceptions are mapped on the scales of welfaristic, conservational, dominionistic, and utilitarian approaches. The methodological approach described in this article integrates static and dynamical views by proposing to analyse the semiotic potential of animals and the dynamics of communicative interactions in combination.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

42

Sharov, Alexei A. "Towards a Biosemiotic Theory of Evolution." Biosemiotics 14, no. 1 (April 2021): 101–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-021-09414-2.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

43

Whitehead, Patrick M. "Goldstein’s self-actualization: A biosemiotic view." Humanistic Psychologist 45, no. 1 (2017): 71–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/hum0000047.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

44

De Jesus, Paulo. "From enactive phenomenology to biosemiotic enactivism." Adaptive Behavior 24, no. 2 (March 8, 2016): 130–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059712316636437.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

45

Galego, Carol-Ann. "Towards a Biosemiotic Understanding of Potentization." Homoeopathic Links 23, no. 01 (2010): 19–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1240875.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

46

Cowley, Stephen J. "Life and language: Is meaning biosemiotic?" Language Sciences 67 (May 2018): 46–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2018.04.004.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

47

Aldinhas Ferreira, Maria Isabel, and Miguel Gama Caldas. "Modelling Artificial Cognition in Biosemiotic Terms." Biosemiotics 6, no. 2 (August 17, 2012): 245–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-012-9159-z.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

48

Tønnessen, Morten. "The Biosemiotic Glossary Project: Agent, Agency." Biosemiotics 8, no. 1 (January 21, 2015): 125–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-015-9229-0.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

49

Kull, Kalevi. "The Biosemiotic Concept of the Species." Biosemiotics 9, no. 1 (March 22, 2016): 61–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-016-9259-2.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

50

Alexander, V. N., and Valerie Grimes. "Fluid Biosemiotic Mechanisms Underlie Subconscious Habits." Biosemiotics 10, no. 3 (July 20, 2017): 337–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12304-017-9298-3.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

Ми пропонуємо знижки на всі преміум-плани для авторів, чиї праці увійшли до тематичних добірок літератури. Зв'яжіться з нами, щоб отримати унікальний промокод!