[Krimel] My point is that this is a very circular argument that elevates the role of symbolic thought and ignores the critical importance of non-symbolic thought which is simply defined away.
[Arlo] Not "defined away", simply defined as something other than "thought". Again, to me, "non-symbolic thought" is an oxymoron. There is, as I've said, non-symbolic experience, but "thought" is the symbolic encoding of this. [Krimel] Numbers and word yes. Images no. Images in memory are not symbolically encoded in the same fashion. They do not stand for something else. [Arlo] Sure they do, they "stand" for whatever it is they are an image of. But maybe here we are getting to Peirce's distinction between icon, sign and symbol. If we are using Peirce's terminology, an "image" often functions iconically, may function symbolically, but is always semiotic. [Krimel] Are you saying that a recording is a semiotic system. I might be able to see digital recording this way but I have a harder time seeing analog recording as semiotic. [Arlo] An audio recording, a painting, and a novel are all semiotically encoded, and semiotically consumed, yes. In all cases, the "artist" makes certain choices about using particular symbols (tones, hues, phrasing, etc) in an attempt to convey specific meaning. Whether you hear this "live" in a concert hall, on an analog record, or as a digital mp3 from iTunes makes no difference. [Krimel] I think there is an innate capacity to emit and understand emotional content both through sound and body language. [Arlo] A baby "learns" to read sounds and body language in a highly social interactive field. As the baby "learns" what this or that "sound" means, and what (even incredibly nuanced) body language means, s/he is at that moment semiotic. The very first moment where s/he understands that a noise s/he makes has "meaning" for another, and this happens very, very early on, the infant begins "reading" and consuming her/his world via symbols. Indeed, prior to this the baby has no concept of "I cry because I am hungry", the biological pain of "she knows not want" causes the infant to cry. As the pain is subdued (though feeding) the infant makes two associations (or more), one that the pain is associated with the pleasure of feeding (of course, not in words like this) and two that the very act of crying is interpreted by the other as a sign to begin feeding. From then on, the baby's cries are semiotic, and the baby learns particular cultural-social concepts such as hunger and taste and how to feed, etc. [Krimel] I think this works in that we have a limited capacity to understand ancient texts. The illusion that we can understand ancient writings is hard for most people to overcome and leads to tragic misunderstanding particularly in the area of religion. This is why for all its faults I prefer the KJV of the Bible. Its style does not allow me the luxury of reading it as a modern work. [Arlo] Agree. [Krimel] Sensations and emotions are autonomic yes and this was my original point that thought and symbols emerges from them not the reverse. But associations between sensation and emotion do not require symbolic mediation. [Arlo] Yes to the first, no to the second. For example, consider Pavlov's dog, who demonstrated the ability to make the association between the bell and the food. Most semioticians (AFAIK) would say that, no, this is not a semiotic event, but would argue that for humans our associations are so enmeshed in our language (we explain things to ourselves) that we rarely have such unconscious animalistic responses. Others would argue that the dog is indeed engaging in semiosis, primitive and non-elaborate semiosis but semiosis anyways. But I suppose the door is open here. [Krimel] In fact I don't think we learn motor skills like driving at all by rehearsing verbal instructions. We do them and adjust our performance according to the emotional valance of rightness or wrongness. [Arlo] First, this is more than just "learning by rehearsing verbal instructions". The act of learning to drive involves learning a whole field of textual, semiotic, cultural symbols. We have to read "STOP" correctly, we are told via language "drive on the right side of the road" and "yield means slow down and let other cars have the right of way", and we come into the act of learning the motor skills _through_ this semiotic involvement. And as we are learning the motor skills, we are always mediating our actions by reviewing a host of factors such as what we learned, what did so and so say to do here, turtle!, etc. Further, we "learn" how to "read" things we see, a deer along the road means slow down, someone flashing their highbeams means a cop ahead or danger of some sort, and these all become part of our semiotic repertoire. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
