Semiosis as an educational instrument: The irrelevance of mediation and the relevance of social capital

Abstract

This paper explores semiosis as an instrument to be used in the classroom in the development of democratic education and a democratic society. In doing so we show the important links between Peirce's later semiotic theory and Dewey's theory of education. The argument is made that later Peirce's works on semiotics should be understood within its Pragmatic context. Semiotics' major contribution to the human condition is as a process and not as a definition. Therefore, even though Peirce wrote far less about the more process-oriented semiosis, this is the aspect of Peirce's theory that is most complementary to Dewey, especially his concept of inquiry, and has the most to offer education. What should be emphasized most are the democratic processes leading to meaningful object-sign-interpretant relationships — active inquiry engendering solutions to relevant community problems. We see two important aspects in using semiosis as a progressive instrument in the classroom. The first is the need to dispense with a concept of mediation that can be isolated from the process of semiosis as a whole. Considering mediation as an isolated phenomenon serves no useful purpose and might actually be deleterious to the community as a whole. The second aspect, dependent on the first, is the recognition that social capital plays in the process of semiosis. Trust between participants is the key ingredient in communication.