Frances - I don't consider your outline as Peircean semiosis but as
semiology, where an object is a sign only when it REFERS TO something else.
That's dyadic, and views the Sign as simply a kind of metaphor of something
else. That's not, in my view, Peirce.
My view is that the object itself, in its own composition, exists as a Sign.
It is a triadic process. A Sign is a unit of matter/energy that exists as a
Form in interaction with other Forms. There must be a triadic set of
Relations: input/mediation/output. Without that triad - it's not a Sign.
Nothing exists 'per se' on its own in isolation but is networked with other
matter - whether it be one molecule interacting with another molecule, one
cell with another cell; one sound with another sound. It is this continuity
of Form which enables this continuity of Connections [see Peirce's outline
of the development of habits' [1.412 A guess at the riddle]. This is the
process of semiosis - that continuous formulation of discrete units formed
within a habit, which are in interaction with other discrete units. As
formed and networked, [which is not at all similar to referencing] they are
therefore 'meaningful'.
Edwina
----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: "'Peirce List'" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Abduction, Deduction, Induction, Analogy,
Inquiry
Frances to Edwina and Listers---
You partly stated in effect recently that a sign "is" meaning, and that if a
sign "has" no meaning then it is not a sign, but is say mere noise. This
seems wrong to me from a Peircean stance, but perhaps others here can
clarify the jargon and with some references. My grasp of the matter is that
in semiosis a "sign vehicle" (like say even just noise) is an ordinary
object that at least represents some other referred object and to some
interpreted effect, and to any kind of signer. In other words, the "sign
vehicle" must informatively "bear" some "sign object" for some "sign effect"
to be a sign overall, but that the "sign vehicle" need not "yield" or
"endure" any meaning at all to be such a sign, even if it may or can or will
"yield" some meaning to an able signer. Any meaningless sign might therefore
be a crude sign or not much of a sign, but it will in any event be a sign to
some degree.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to
[email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L
but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the
BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm
.
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
