Search results for 'biosemiotics' (try it on Scholar)

341 found
Sort by:
  1. Argyris Arnellos, Luis Emilio Bruni, Charbel Niño El-Hani & John Collier (2012). Anticipatory Functions, Digital-Analog Forms and Biosemiotics: Integrating the Tools to Model Information and Normativity in Autonomous Biological Agents. Biosemiotics 5 (3):331-367.score: 21.0
    We argue that living systems process information such that functionality emerges in them on a continuous basis. We then provide a framework that can explain and model the normativity of biological functionality. In addition we offer an explanation of the anticipatory nature of functionality within our overall approach. We adopt a Peircean approach to Biosemiotics, and a dynamical approach to Digital-Analog relations and to the interplay between different levels of functionality in autonomous systems, taking an integrative approach. We then (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Prisca Augustyn (2009). Uexküll, Peirce, and Other Affinities Between Biosemiotics and Biolinguistics. Biosemiotics 2 (1):1-17.score: 21.0
    The purpose of this paper is to describe some parallels and theoretical affinities between biosemiotics and biolinguistics. In particular, this paper examines the importance of Uexküll's Umwelt and Peircean abduction as foundational concepts for Sebeok's biosemiotics and Chomsky's biolinguistic program. Other affinities touched upon in this paper include references to concepts articulated by Immanuel Kant, Konrad Lorenz, Marcel Florkin, François Jacob, C.H. Waddington, D'Arcy Thomson and Ernst Haeckel. While both programs share theoretical influences and historiographical parallels in their (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Marcello Barbieri (2009). A Short History of Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 2 (2):221-245.score: 21.0
    Biosemiotics is the synthesis of biology and semiotics, and its main purpose is to show that semiosis is a fundamental component of life, i.e., that signs and meaning exist in all living systems. This idea started circulating in the 1960s and was proposed independently from enquires taking place at both ends of the Scala Naturae. At the molecular end it was expressed by Howard Pattee’s analysis of the genetic code, whereas at the human end it took the form of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Eliseo Fernández (2010). Taking the Relational Turn: Biosemiotics and Some New Trends in Biology. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 3 (2):147-156.score: 21.0
    A cluster of similar trends emerging in separate fields of science and philosophy points to new opportunities to apply biosemiotic ideas as tools for conceptual integration in theoretical biology. I characterize these developments as the outcome of a “relational turn” in these disciplines. They signal a shift of attention away from objects and things and towards relational structures and processes. Increasingly sophisticated research technologies of molecular biology have generated an enormous quantity of experimental data, sparking a need for relational approaches (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Riin Magnus (2008). Biosemiotics Within and Without Biological Holism: A Semio-Historical Analysis. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 1 (3):379-396.score: 21.0
    On the basis of a comparative analysis of the biosemiotic work of Jakob von Uexküll and of various theories on biological holism, this article takes a look at the question: what is the status of a semiotic approach in respect to a holistic one? The period from 1920 to 1940 was the peak-time of holistic theories, despite the fact that agreement on a unified and accepted set of holistic ideas was never reached. A variety of holisms, dependent on the cultural (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Timo Maran & Karel Kleisner (2010). Towards an Evolutionary Biosemiotics: Semiotic Selection and Semiotic Co-Option. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 3 (2):189-200.score: 21.0
    In biosemiotics, living beings are not conceived of as the passive result of anonymous selection pressures acted upon through the course of evolution. Rather, organisms are considered active participants that influence, shape and re-shape other organisms, the surrounding environment, and eventually also their own constitutional and functional integrity. The traditional Darwinian division between natural and sexual selection seems insufficient to encompass the richness of these processes, particularly in light of recent knowledge on communicational processes in the realm of life. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Søren Brier & Cliff Joslyn (2013). What Does It Take to Produce Interpretation? Informational, Peircean and Code-Semiotic Views on Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 6 (1):143-159.score: 18.0
    This paper presents a critical analysis of code-semiotics, which we see as the latest attempt to create paradigmatic foundation for solving the question of the emergence of life and consciousness. We view code semiotics as a an attempt to revise the empirical scientific Darwinian paradigm, and to go beyond the complex systems, emergence, self-organization, and informational paradigms, and also the selfish gene theory of Dawkins and the Peircean pragmaticist semiotic theory built on the simultaneous types of evolution. As such it (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Prisca Augustyn (2011). On the Concept of Code in Linguistics and Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 4 (3):281-289.score: 18.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. James Goss (2011). Poetics in Schizophrenic Language: Speech, Gesture and Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 4 (3):291-307.score: 18.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Kalevi Kull, Terrence Deacon, Claus Emmeche, Jesper Hoffmeyer & Frederik Stjernfelt (2009). Theses on Biosemiotics: Prolegomena to a Theoretical Biology. Biological Theory 4 (2):167-173.score: 16.0
    Theses on the semiotic study of life as presented here provide a collectively formulated set of statements on what biology needs to be focused on in order to describe life as a process based on semiosis, or sign action. An aim of the biosemiotic approach is to explain how life evolves through all varieties of forms of communication and signification (including cellular adaptive behavior, animal communication, and human intellect) and to provide tools for grounding sign theories. We introduce the concept (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. James Carney (2008). Advertising and the Predation Loop: A Biosemiotic Model. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 1 (3):313-327.score: 15.0
    The basic premise of biosemiotics as a discipline is that there are elementary processes linking signifying strategies in all forms of animate life. Correspondingly, the discoveries of biosemiotics should, in principle, be capable of revealing new insights about human signification. In the present article, I show that this is in fact the case by constructing a biosemiotic model that links advertising strategies with corresponding structures in animal predation. The methodological framework for this model is the catastrophe theory of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Paul Cobley (2010). The Cultural Implications of Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 3 (2):225-244.score: 15.0
    This article focuses on the cultural implications of biosemiotics, considering the extent to which biosemiotics constitutes an “epistemological break” with modern modes of conceptualizing the world. To some extent, the article offers a series of footnotes to points made in the work of Jesper Hoffmeyer. However, it is argued that the move towards ‘agency’ represented in biosemiotics needs to be approached with caution in light of problems of translation between the humanities and the sciences. Notwithstanding these problems, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Donald Favareau (2008). The Biosemiotic Turn. Biosemiotics 1 (1):5-23.score: 15.0
    With the publication of this inaugural issue of the internationally peer-reviewed journal Biosemiotics, our still-developing young interdiscipline marks yet another milestone in its journey towards adulthood. For this occasion, the editors of Biosemiotics have asked me to provide for those readers who may be newcomers to our field a very brief overview of the history of biosemiotics, contextualizing it within and against the larger currents of philosophical and scientific thinking from which it has emerged. To explain the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Eliseo Fernández (2008). Signs and Instruments: The Convergence of Aristotelian and Kantian Intuitions in Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 1 (3):347-359.score: 15.0
    Biosemiotics—a discipline in the process of becoming established as a new research enterprise—faces a double task. On the one hand it must carry out the theoretical and experimental investigation of an enormous range of semiotic phenomena relating organisms to their internal components and to other organisms (e.g., signal transduction, replication, codes, etc.). On the other hand, it must achieve a philosophical re-conceptualization and generalization of theoretical biology in light of the essential role played by semiotic notions in biological explanation (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Jonathan Hope & Pierre-Louis Patoine (2009). “Does a Glass of White Wine Taste Like a Glass of Domain Sigalas Santorini Asirtiko Athiri 2005?” A Biosemiotic Approach to Wine-Tasting. Biosemiotics 2 (1):65-76.score: 15.0
    The object of our paper is to examine how wine-related knowledge and practices play an important role in determining the respective flavour experiences of novice wine drinkers and sommeliers. We defend the idea that sensation is informed by knowledge, as it circulates in a cultural environment. Biosemiotics has developed appropriate concepts helping us understand how the same wine can generate diverging experiences. Within a biosemiotic framework, we consider wine flavours as relational, semiosic experiences produced by the convergence of sensory-discriminative, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Karel Kleisner (2008). The Semantic Morphology of Adolf Portmann: A Starting Point for the Biosemiotics of Organic Form? [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 1 (2):207-219.score: 15.0
    This paper develops the ideas of the Swiss zoologist Adolf Portmann or, more precisely, his concept of organic self-representation, wherein Portmann considered the outer surface of living organisms as a specific organ that serves in a self-representational role. This idea is taken as a starting point from which to elaborate Portman’s ideas, so as to make them compatible with the theoretical framework of biosemiotics. Today, despite the many theories that help us understand aposematism, camouflage, deception and other phenomena related (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Dario Martinelli & Kristian Bankov (2008). Bankov's Razor Versus Martinelli's Canon. A Confrontation Around Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 1 (3):397-418.score: 15.0
    This article is a discussion of the critical remarks raised by Kristian Bankov in a notion called Bankov’s razor, about some foundational elements of the biosemiotic paradigm. The elaborated form of the “razor” includes three main questions on biosemiotic ideas, namely: 1) the philosophical grounds of the biosemiotic discourse, 2) the scientific output of biosemiotics, and 3) the ethical consequences of some biosemiotic presumptions (this latter, given its scopes and extension, is left for a future occasion). Such questions are (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. H. H. Pattee (2009). Response by H. H. Pattee to Jon Umerez's Paper: “Where Does Pattee's “How Does a Molecule Become a Message?” Belong in the History of Biosemiotics?”. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 2 (3):291-302.score: 15.0
    Umerez’s analysis made me aware of the fundamental differences in the culture of physics and molecular biology and the culture of semiotics from which the new field of biosemiotics arose. These cultures also view histories differently. Considering the evolutionary span and the many hierarchical levels of organization that their models must cover, models at different levels will require different observables and different meanings for common words, like symbol, interpretation, and language. These models as well as their histories should be (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Jon Umerez (2009). Where Does Pattee's “How Does a Molecule Become a Message?” Belong in the History of Biosemiotics? Biosemiotics 2 (3):269-290.score: 15.0
    Recalling the title of Yoxen’s classical paper on the influence of Schrödinger’s book, I analyze the role that the work of H. Pattee might have played, if any, in the development of Biosemiotics. I take his 1969 paper “How does a molecule become a message?” (Developmental Biology Supplement) as a first target due to several circumstances that make it especially salient. On the one hand, even if Pattee has obviously developed further his ideas on later papers, the significance of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Dennis P. Waters (2012). Von Neumann's Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata: A Useful Framework for Biosemiotics? Biosemiotics 5 (1):5-15.score: 15.0
    As interpreted by Pattee, von Neumann’s Theory of Self-Reproducing Automata has proved to be a useful tool for understanding some of the difficulties and paradoxes of molecular biosemiotics. But is its utility limited to molecular systems or is it more generally applicable within biosemiotics? One way of answering that question is to look at the Theory as a model for one particular high-level biosemiotic activity, human language. If the model is not useful for language, then it certainly cannot (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Jonathan Beever (2012). Meaning Matters: The Biosemiotic Basis of Bioethics. Biosemiotics 5 (2):181-191.score: 13.0
    If the central problem in philosophical ethics is determining and defining the scope of moral value, our normative ethical theories must be able to explain on what basis and to what extent entities have value. The scientific foundation of contemporary biosemiotic theory grounds a theory of moral value capable of addressing this problem. Namely, it suggests that what is morally relevant is semiosis. Within this framework, semiosis is a morally relevant and natural property of all living things thereby offering us (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Almo Farina (2012). A Biosemiotic Perspective of the Resource Criterion: Toward a General Theory of Resources. Biosemiotics 5 (1):17-32.score: 13.0
    Describing resources and their relationships with organisms seems to be a useful approach to a ‘unified ecology’, contributing to fill the gap between natural and human oriented processes, and opening new perspectives in dealing with biological complexity. This Resource Criterion defines the main properties of resources, describes the mechanisms that link them to individual species, and gives a particular emphasis to the biosemiotic approach that allows resources to be identified inside a heterogeneous ecological medium adopting the eco-field model. In particular, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Kalevi Kull & Ekaterina Velmezova (2012). Biosemiotics in a Gallery. Biosemiotics 5 (3):313-317.score: 13.0
    In this article we review the biosemiotic art exhibition «Signs of life» (Livstegn), that was organized by the Danish installation artist Morten Skriver and the biosemiotician Jesper Hoffmeyer in 2011 at the Esbjerg Art Museum (Denmark). The exhibition presented five central (bio)semiotic concepts using artistic tools: the semiosphere, the sign, semiotic scaffolding, semiotic freedom, and surfaces.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Shahram Rafieian (2012). A Biosemiotic Approach to the Problem of Structure and Agency. Biosemiotics 5 (1):83-93.score: 13.0
    A human being is the simultaneous composite of several different levels of being, from atomic and subatomic to the level of complex social interaction, and these levels are nested within the individual hierarchically (lower levels giving rise to higher levels, etc.). One of the most important and influential approaches developed in the history of science has been that of systems theory and systemic thinking, in which the different levels of the hierarchy, and the interactions between those levels, are considered simultaneously. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Wendy Wheeler (2010). Delectable Creatures and the Fundamental Reality of Metaphor: Biosemiotics and Animal Mind. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 3 (3):277-287.score: 13.0
    This article argues that organisms, defined by a semi-permeable membrane or skin separating organism from environment, are (must be) semiotically alert responders to environments (both Innenwelt and Umwelt). As organisms and environments complexify over time, so, necessarily, does semiotic responsiveness, or ‘semiotic freedom’. In complex environments, semiotic responsiveness necessitates increasing plasticity of discernment, or discrimination. Such judgements, in other words, involve interpretations. The latter, in effect, consist of translations of a range of sign relations which, like metaphor, are based on (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Andrew Robinson, Christopher Southgate & Terrence Deacon (2010). Discussion of the Conceptual Basis of Biosemiotics. Zygon 45 (2):409-418.score: 12.0
    Kalevi Kull and colleagues recently proposed eight theses as a conceptual basis for the field of biosemiotics. We use these theses as a framework for discussing important current areas of debate in biosemiotics with particular reference to the articles collected in this issue of Zygon.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Attila Grandpierre (2013). The Origin of Cellular Life and Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics (3):1-15.score: 12.0
    Recent successes of systems biology clarified that biological functionality is multilevel. We point out that this fact makes it necessary to revise popular views about macromolecular functions and distinguish between local, physico-chemical and global, biological functions. Our analysis shows that physico-chemical functions are merely tools of biological functionality. This result sheds new light on the origin of cellular life, indicating that in evolutionary history, assignment of biological functions to cellular ingredients plays a crucial role. In this wider picture, even if (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Gail Bruner Murrow & Richard W. Murrow (2013). A Biosemiotic Body of Law: The Neurobiology of Justice. [REVIEW] International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 26 (2):275-314.score: 12.0
    We offer a theory regarding the symbolism of the human body in legal discourse. The theory blends legal theory, the neuroscience of empathy, and biosemiotics, a branch of semiotics that combines semiotics with theoretical biology. Our theory posits that this symbolism of the body is not solely a metaphor or semiotic sign of how law is cognitively structured in the mind. We propose that it also signifies neurobiological mechanisms of social emotion in the brain that are involved in the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. K. Bielecka (2012). Biosemiotics and Constructivism: Strong Allies. Review of “Essential Readings in Biosemiotics” Edited by Donald Favareau. Constructivist Foundations 7 (3):228-230.score: 12.0
    Upshot: The reader presents a unique collection of the most important works in biosemiotics. It spans 880 pages, describing classical and modern theories, with excerpts from the most significant papers on the topic of biosemiotics, as well as suggesting further reading on the topic.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Søren Brier & Cliff Joslyn (2013). Information in Biosemiotics: Introduction to the Special Issue. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 6 (1):1-7.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Koichiro Matsuno (2013). Toward Accommodating Biosemiotics with Experimental Sciences. Biosemiotics 6 (1):125-141.score: 12.0
    Chemical affinity is by itself inclusive of the action of a sign. Naturalization of the action of a sign is latent in the material organization holding its own identity by means of the exchange of material. A concrete experimental example is the citric acid cycle running in the absence of biological enzymes. The carbon atoms to be exchanged round the cycle serve as the signs for holding the cycle as a natural system. The action of a sign operates in the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Joachim De Beule, Eivind Hovig & Mikael Benson (2011). Introducing Dynamics Into the Field of Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 4 (1):5-24.score: 12.0
  33. Prisca Augustyn (2009). Translating Jakob von Uexküll — Reframing Umweltlehre as Biosemiotics. Sign Systems Studies 37 (1-2):281-297.score: 12.0
    Thomas Sebeok attributed it to what he called the ‘wretched’ translation of Uexküll’s Theoretische Biologie (1920) that the notion of Umwelt did not reachthe Anglo-American intellectual community much earlier. There is no doubt that making more of Uexküll’s Umweltlehre available in English will not only furtherthe 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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Marcello Barbieri (2009). For a Scientific Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 2 (2):127-129.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Marcello Barbieri (2010). On the Origin of Language. Biosemiotics 3 (2):201-223.score: 12.0
    Thomas Sebeok and Noam Chomsky are the acknowledged founding fathers of two research fields which are known respectively as Biosemiotics and Biolinguistics and which have been developed in parallel during the past 50 years. Both fields claim that language has biological roots and must be studied as a natural phenomenon, thus bringing to an end the old divide between nature and culture. In addition to this common goal, there are many other important similarities between them. Their definitions of language, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Marcello Barbieri (2008). The Scylla and Charybdis of Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 1 (3):281-284.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Marcello Barbieri (2008). What is Biosemiotics? Biosemiotics 1 (1):1-3.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Gérard Battail (2009). Applying Semiotics and Information Theory to Biology: A Critical Comparison. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 2 (3):303-320.score: 12.0
    Since the beginning of the XX-th century, it became increasingly evident that information, besides matter and energy, is a major actor in the life processes. Moreover, communication of information has been recognized as differentiating living things from inanimate ones, hence as specific to the life processes. Therefore the sciences of matter and energy, chemistry and physics, do not suffice to deal with life processes. Biology should also rely on sciences of information. A majority of biologists, however, did not change their (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Mette Miriam Rakel Böll (2008). Social is Emotional. Biosemiotics 1 (3):329-345.score: 12.0
    This is a biological approach to the philosophy of mind that feeds an investigation of the phenomena of “social” and “emotional”, both of which are widespread in nature. I scrutinize the non-dualistic Darwinian concept of the continuity of mind. For practical reasons, I address mind at different levels of organization: The systemic mind are the properties of which a common, coherent evolution works upon. Separated from this is “language-mind”: the crystallization of thought in words, which is a strictly human phenomenon. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Han-Liang Chang (2009). Semioticians Make Strange Bedfellows! Or, Once Again: “Is Language a Primary Modelling System?”. [REVIEW] Biosemiotics 2 (2):169-179.score: 12.0
    Like other sciences, biosemiotics also has its time-honoured archive, consisting of writings by those who have been invented and revered as ancestors of the discipline. One such example is Jakob von Uexküll. As to the people who ‘invented’ him, they are either, to paraphrase a French cliché, ‘agents du cosmopolitisme sémiotique’ like Thomas Sebeok, or de jure and de facto progenitor like Thure von Uexküll. In the archive is the special issue of Semiotica 42. 1 (1982) edited by the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Joachim De Beule (2012). Von Neumann's Legacy for a Scientific Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 5 (1):1-4.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. John Deely (forthcoming). Semiotics and Biosemiotics: Are Sign-Science and Life-Science Coextensive. Biosemiotics: The Semiotic Web 1991.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Walter Gulick (2012). “Polanyian Biosemiotics and the From-Via-To Dimensions of Meaning”. Tradition and Discovery: The Polanyi Society Periodical 39 (1):18-33.score: 12.0
    A central aim of Michael Polanyi’s philosophy is to demonstrate the many ways in which human existence is meaningful to counter the nihilistic and positivistic accounts that contributed to the world wars and totalitarian governments in the twentieth century. Yet Polanyi’s references to various sorts of meaning is suggestive rather than systematic and coherent. The objective of this essay is to show the relationship between the different aspects of meaning by viewing their emergence in cosmological perspective beginning with simple forms (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Walter A. Koch (forthcoming). Ecogenesis and Echogenesis: Some Problems for Biosemiotics. Biosemiotics: The Semiotic Web.score: 12.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Anton Markoš (2009). Do Biosemiotics, But Don't Forget Semiosis. Biosemiotics 2 (1):117-119.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Seán O. Nualláin & Tom Doris (2012). Consciousness is Cheap, Even If Symbols Are Expensive; Metabolism and the Brain's Dark Energy. Biosemiotics 5 (2):193-210.score: 12.0
    Use of symbols, the key to the biosemiotics field as to many others, required bigger brains which implied a promissory note for greater energy consumption; symbols are obviously expensive. A score years before the current estimate of 18–20% for the human brain’s metabolic demand on the organism, it was known that neural tissue is metabolically dear. This paper first discusses two evolutionary responses to this demand, on both of which there is some consensus. The first, assigning care of altricial (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Susan Petrilli & Augusto Ponzio (2008). A Tribute to Thomas A. Sebeok. Biosemiotics 1 (1):25-39.score: 12.0
    According to the approach developed by Thomas A. Sebeok (1921–2001) and his ‘global semiotics,’ semiosis and life converge. This leads to his cardinal axiom: ‘semiosis is the criterial attribute of life.’ His global approach to sign life presupposes his critique of anthropocentrism and glottocentrism. Global semiotics is open to zoosemiotics, indeed, even more broadly, biosemiotics which extends its gaze to semiosis in the whole living universe to include the realms of macro- and microorganisms. In Sebeok’s conception, the sign science (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Alexei A. Sharov (forthcoming). Biosemiotics: A Functional-Evolutionary Approach to the Analysis of the Sense of Information. Biosemiotics: The Semiotic Web.score: 12.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Tommi Vehkavaara (2002). Why and How to Naturalize Semiotic Concepts for Biosemiotics. Sign Systems Studies 30 (1):293-312.score: 12.0
    Any attempt to develop biosemiotics either towards a new biological ground theory or towards a metaphysics of living nature necessitates some kind of naturalization of its semiotic concepts. Instead of standard physicalistic naturalism, a certain kind of semiotic naturalism is pursued here. The naturalized concepts are defined as referring only to the objects of our external experience. When the semiotic concepts are applied to natural phenomena in biosemiotics, there is a risk of falling into anthropomorphic errors if the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Kalevi Kull, Claus Emmeche & Donald Favareau (2008). Biosemiotic Questions. Biosemiotics 1 (1):41-55.score: 11.0
    This paper examines the biosemiotic approach to the study of life processes by fashioning a series of questions that any worthwhile semiotic study of life should ask. These questions can be understood simultaneously as: (1) questions that distinguish a semiotic biology from a non-semiotic (i.e., reductionist–physicalist) one; (2) questions that any student in biosemiotics should ask when doing a case study; and (3) still currently unanswered questions of biosemiotics. In addition, some examples of previously undertaken biosemiotic case studies (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 341