Hi,
(*1*) S. Brier constructed a comprehensive theory of life world called
"cybersemiotics" by integrating information theory or cybernetics,
first-person consciousness, and Peircean semiotics [1]. His cybersemiotic
theory is symbolized by the so-called the “Cybersemiotic Star” (CS)
consisting of the four nodes labeled *Energy, Life, Consciousness, *and*
Meaning* [1, Fig. 9.1]. This diagram is amazingly similar in structure to
the "semiotics of life" theory depicted as the gnergy tetrahedron (GT) as
shown in Figure 47 in [2] and Figure 10.7 in [3]. Both these CS and GT
diagrams contain four nodes with similar names as evident in *Table 1*
below. The four nodes of the gnergy tetrahedron can be shown to “covers”
the four nodes of the cybersemiotic star but not *vice versa. *For example,
Matter covers Life, indicating that matter is necessary for life but life
is not necessary for matter, since there are matter that is not a part of
living organisms. For this reason, in mathematical terms, cybersemiotics
can be viewed as a surjective co-domain of the gnergy tetrahedron, or
cybersemiotics can be viewed as a function of the gnergy tertrahedron. One
consequence of this analysis seems to be that cybersemiotics is supported
by the gnergy tetrahedron. As will be discussed in (*2*), the difference
between CS and GT is that the former is a description of life world, while
GT is a theoretical model of it embodying two main principles, the
principles of *supplementarity* and *complementarity* first enunciated by
N. Bohr based on quantum physics in the 1920's [4].
*Table 1.* A comparison between the cybersemiotic star (CS) [1] and the
gnergy tetrahedron (GT) [2, 3]: CS is the surjective co-domain of GT, or
CS is the function of GT that embodies the principle of supplementarity and
complementarity [4].
0 Edge
0
Node 0
*Morphisms *[5, 6]
*Functors *[5, 6]
(*Supplementarity*)
[4]
*Natural Transformation *[5, 6]
(*Complementarity*)
[4]
Cybernetic
Star [1]
Gnergy
Tetrahedron
[2, 3]
1
*Energy*
*Energy*
*Mattergy* [4]
*GNERGY** [4, 7]
2
*Life*
*Matter*
3
*Consciousness*
*Life*
*Liformation*** [4]
4
*Meaning*
*Information*
*Coined in 1991 by combining Greek stems, "gn-" from gnosis meaning
knowledge and "-ergy" from ergon meaning work or energy [7]. Discrete units
of gnergy are called "gnergons" whose existence have been experimentally
demonstrated in the forms of conformons, conformational strains stored in
sequence-specific sites within biopoymers such as DNA supercoils and SIDS
(stress-induced duplex destabilizations), etc. (reviewed in [8]).
**Coined in 2012 [4] by combining "life" and "information" in analogy to
"mattergy" which is the combination of "matter" and "energy".
(*2*) Another way of comparing the cybersemiotic star and the gnergy
tetrahedron is on the basis of the ITR (Irreducible Triadic Relation)
template/diagram as shown in Figure 1 below.
f
g
*Phaneron* -------> *Cybersemiotic Star* -------> *Genergy
Tetrahedron*
(Phenomenon) (Phaneroscopy)
(Models/Theories/Habits)
[Firstness] [Secondness]
[Thirdness]
<Object> <Representamen>
<Interpretant>
{Reality} {Names}
{Ideas}
|
^
|
|
|___________________________________________|
h
Figure 1. The ITR (Irreducible Triadic Relation) as the organizing
principle of human knowing.
As you can see, Figure 1 consists of 5 layers, to each of which the ITR can
be applied. The meaning of the structure-preserving mappings, f, g and h,
would depend on the layers involved, and my current suggestions are given
below (if anyone has better ideas or corrections, please let me know):
Layer 1: f = description; g = theorizing; h = intersubjective
correspondence
Layer 2: f = description; g = cognition; h = intersubjective
correspondence
Layer 3: f = perception; g = cognition; h = reasoning, thinking
Layer 4*: *f = sign production; g = sign interpretation; h = grounding
Layer 5: f = description; g = abstraction, generalization, theorizing; h
= intersubjective correspondence
(*3*) In Figure 1, Represntamen is considered to be Secondness, whereas
Peirce often (if not all the time ?) considered it as Firstness. Any
illuminating comments on this topic would be appreciated.
(*4*) According to Figure 1, the age-old debate about *realism*,
*nominalism* and *idealism* may be resolved by viewing these isms as the
prescinded versions of the *irreducible triad* of Reality, Names and
Ideas.
(*5*) To the extent that the above speculations turn out to be valid, to
that extent, ITR may be considered to provide a guiding (*mathematical*)
principle for organizing *philosophies* and *special sciences *in agreement
with the architectonic theory of human knowledge advocated by Peirce.
All the best.
Sung
____________________________________________
Sungchul Ji, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology
Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy
Rutgers University
Piscataway, N.J. 08855
732-445-4701
www.conformon.ne <http://www.conformon.net/>
References:
[1] Brier, S. (2013). Cybersemiotics: Why Information Is Not Enough!
University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
[2] Ji, S. (2004). Semiotics of Life: A Unified Theory of Molecular
Machines, Cells, the Mind, Peircean Signs, and the Universe Based on the
Principle of Information-Energy Complementarity, in: Reports, Research
Group on Mathematical Linguistics, XVII Tarragona Seminar on Formal Syntax
and Semantics, Rovira i Virgili University, Tarragona, Spain, April 23-27,
2003. PDF Available at
http://grammars.grlmc.com/GRLMC/reports/SOLManuscriptsubmitted_final.doc
or http://www.confromon.net under Publications > Proceedings and
Abstracts.
[3] Ji, S. (2012). Molecular theory of the Living Cell: Concepts,
Molecular Mechanisms, and Biomedical Applications. Springer, New York. P.
289.
[4] Ji, S. (2012). Ibid. Pp. 24-29. PDF at http://www.confromon.net under
Publications > Book Chapters.
[5] Spivak, D. I. (2013). Category Theory for Scientists.
http://math.mit.edu/~dspivak/teaching/sp13/CT4S--static.pdf
[6] Brown, R. and Porter, T. (20xx). Category Theory: an abstract
setting for analogy and comparison.
http://pages.bangor.ac.uk/~mas010/Analogy-and-Comparison.pdf
[7] Ji, S. (1991). The Biological Model of the Universe: The Shillongator.
<http://www.conformon.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Shillongator_110720111.pdf>
In: *Molecular Theories of Cell Life and Death *(S. Ji, ed.), The
Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp. 152-163, 230-237. PDF at
http://www.confromon.net under Publications > Book Chapters.
[8] Ji, S. (2012). Ibid. Experimental Evidence for Conformons. Pp.
240-243.
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
