Abstract
This short essay seeks to identify and prevent a pitfall that attends less careful inquiries into “physiosemiosis.” It is emphasized that, in order to truly establish the presence of sign-action in the non-living world, all the components of a triadic sign – including the interpretant – would have to be abiotic (that is, not dependent on a living organism). Failure to heed this necessary condition can lead one to hastily confuse a natural sign (like smoke coming from fire) for an instance of abiotic semiosis. A more rigorous and reserved approach to the topic is called for.
About the author
Marc Champagne (b. 1976) is a teaching assistant at York University 〈gnosiology@hotmail.com〉. His research interests include semiotics and philosophy of mind. His publications include “What anchors semiosis: How Descartes changed the subject” (2009); “Some semiotic constraints on metarepresentational accounts of consciousness” (2009); “Explaining the qualitative dimension of consciousness: Prescission instead of reification” (2009); and “Axiomatizing umwelt normativity” (2011).
©[2013] by Walter de Gruyter Berlin Boston
