Towards a Multi-Level Approach to the Emergence of Meaning Processes in Living Systems

Abstract

Any description of the emergence and evolution of different types of meaning processes (semiosis, sensu C.S.Peirce) in living systems must be supported by a theoretical framework which makes it possible to understand the nature and dynamics of such processes. Here we propose that the emergence of semiosis of different kinds can be understood as resulting from fundamental interactions in a triadically-organized hierarchical process. To grasp these interactions, we develop a model grounded on Stanley Salthe's hierarchical structuralism. This model can be applied to establish, in a general sense, a set of theoretical constraints for explaining the instantiation of different kinds of meaning processes (iconic, indexical, symbolic) in semiotic systems. We use it to model a semiotic process in the immune system, namely, B-cell activation, in order to offer insights into the heuristic role it can play in the development of explanations for specific semiotic processes.

Intersemiotic translation and transformational creativity

“…(MS 793:1-3. See EP 2.544, n.22, for a slightly different version) 1 The object of sign communication is a form, or habit (or a 'pattern of constraints') embodied as a constraining factor of interpretative behavior -a logical 'would be' fact of response (see Queiroz and El-Hani 2004). 2 The habit is something that is embodied in the object as a regularity, a 'disposition' …”

On Representation in Information Theory

“…Semiotics is a theory of representation-it is things standing for other things, clearly to be distinguished in some views (see for example Quieroz and El-Hani [24]) from "reactive", that is physical systems, composed of "Dynamical Objects". In a sense this is exactly the problem I address: the semiotic relation is one of "standing", that is inactive and causally and physically inert.…”

“…In a sense this is exactly the problem I address: the semiotic relation is one of "standing", that is inactive and causally and physically inert. The LIR thesis can be illustrated, if not proved, by reference to a citation by these authors from Peirce ( [24], p. 15): "…we have to distinguish the Immediate Object, which is the Object as the Sign itself represents it, and whose Being is thus dependent upon the Representation of it in the Sign, from the Dynamical Object, which is the Reality which by some means contrives to determine the Sign to its Representation" (CP 4.536) (emphasis mine). For me, this statement is an implied disavowal of a purely semiotic concept of the representational relation.…”

“…The essential binding of the two terms is indicated in Quieroz and El-Hani ( [24]). With Burgin, I claim that it is necessary to see information, better the information generation process not as a symbolic operator but as a natural and social operator.…”

The Biosemiotic Approach in Biology: Theoretical Bases and Applied Models

“…(A semiotic analysis of signal transduction systems follows. See also Bruni 2003 , Queiroz andEl-Hani 2006b , and El-Hani, Arnellos, and Queiroz 2007 .) These relations cannot be understood only in terms of molecular interactions taking place in networks of signal transduction, because this latter process crucially involves semiotic events, as the widespread usage of information talk in modeling and explaining signaling pathways clearly suggests.…”