scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal Article

On semiosis, Umwelt, and semiosphere

01 Jan 1998-Semiotica (De Gruyter)-Vol. 120, pp 299-310
TL;DR: In this article, Hoffmeyer et al. define and comment les notions de semiosis, environnement, and semiosphere sur lesquelles repose l'entreprise biosemiotique de Hoffmeyer, operant un tournant cognitif dans le domaine de la biologie.
Abstract: Dans le cadre du numero de la revue «Semiotica» (120, 3/4, 1998) consacre a la lecture de l'ouvrage de J. Hoffmeyer intitule «Signs of meaning in the universe» (1996), l'A. se propose de definir et de commenter les notions de semiosis, environnement et semiosphere sur lesquelles repose l'entreprise biosemiotique de Hoffmeyer, operant un tournant cognitif dans le domaine de la biologie. Examinant les finalites et les methodes de la biosemiotique concernant le concept d'information, le dualisme esprit-corps, l'opposition sciences humaines/sciences naturelles et humanite/nature, l'A. montre que la discipline definie par Hoffmeyer inaugure un nouveau paradigme en biologie empirique comme en biologie theorique, dressant des ponts entre des systemes complexes
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The genotype-phenotype distinction is a primeval epistemic cut that separates energy-degenerate, rate-independent genetic symbols from the rate-dependent dynamics of construction that they control as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Evolution requires the genotype–phenotype distinction, a primeval epistemic cut that separates energy-degenerate, rate-independent genetic symbols from the rate-dependent dynamics of construction that they control. This symbol–matter or subject–object distinction occurs at all higher levels where symbols are related to a referent by an arbitrary code. The converse of control is measurement in which a rate-dependent dynamical state is coded into quiescent symbols. Non-integrable constraints are one necessary condition for bridging the epistemic cut by measurement, control, and coding. Additional properties of heteropolymer constraints are necessary for biological evolution.

160 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The eco-field hypothesis is presented as a new possibility to describe landscape processes according to an organismic-centered-view and promises a new testing ground for experimental investigations in landscape ecology and in related disciplines including environmental psychology, cognitive ethology, cultural ecology, landscape aesthetics, design and planning.
Abstract: Cognition is recognized as an essential component of the living strategies of organisms and the use of cognitive approaches based on an organismic-centered-view is discussed as a strategy to aid the advancement of landscape ecology to a more independent scientific discipline. The incorporation of the theory of information, the theory of meaning and the Umwelt, and the biosemiotic models into the landscape ecology framework is described as the necessary step to create a common paradigmatic background and operational tools to develop basis for a cognitive landscape ecology. Three cognitive landscapes (neutrality-based landscape, individual-based landscape and observer-based landscape) have been described as the result of distinctive mechanisms to extract information from a cognitive matrix based on a growing literature of (bio)semiotic exchange. The eco-field hypothesis is presented as a new possibility to describe landscape processes according to an organismic-centered-view. The eco-field is defined as a spatial configuration carrier of a specific meaning perceived when a specific living function is activated. A species-specific cognitive landscape is composed of all the spatial configurations involved for all the living functions for a particular organism. Eco-field hypothesis offers a detailed vision of (habitat) environmental requirements and creates a novel conceptual bridge between niche, habitat, Umwelt and the methodological approaches of spatial ecology. Finally the eco-field hypothesis promises a new testing ground for experimental investigations in landscape ecology and in related disciplines including environmental psychology, cognitive ethology, cultural ecology, landscape aesthetics, design and planning.

115 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: For instance, the authors argues that a growing discontent with what was being offered as (or in lieu of) "explanation" regarding the nature of empirically observed, real-world sign processes in their respective fields of origin appears to be the single most common impetus setting the majority of these researchers on their respective paths to what has now converged to become the growing interdisciplinary project of biosemiotics.
Abstract: Having spent the last six years in regular correspondence with the world’s small but steadily growing population of “biosemioticians,” I feel warranted in saying of this diverse group of molecular biologists, neuroscientists, zoologists, anthropologists, psychologists and philosophers, that while each one more or less found their way into this common project alone – proceeding from vastly different starting points and through drastically varying routes – it might yet not be too broad a claim to say that a growing discontent with what was being offered as (or in lieu of) “explanation” regarding the nature of empirically observed, real-world sign processes in their respective fields of origin appears to be the single most common impetus setting the majority of these researchers on their respective paths to what has now converged to become the growing interdisciplinary project of biosemiotics. Indeed, my own entry into this field came as the result of my growing discontent with the inability of cognitive neuroscience to confront issues of experiential “meaning” at the same level that it was so successful in, and manifestly committed to studying the mechanics of those very same electro-chemical transmission events by which such meanings were being asserted (but not explained) to, be produced. For the 1990s were declared (by fiat of an actual act of Congress) to be “The Decade of the Brain” in the United States – and, reservations about the seriousness of such self-aggrandizing hyperbole aside, this period did indeed see a great explosion of ideas and energy emanating out of such newly minted hybrid research projects

94 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a new paradigm called eco-field is proposed, which integrates the vision of the landscape as a neutral matrix (like a habitat) in which organisms are living, and contemporarily as a product of the human mind.
Abstract: In the spirit of the theory of biocomplexity and of the non-linear emergent characters of ecological systems, the eco-field is a new paradigm that integrates the vision of the landscape as a neutral matrix (like a habitat) in which organisms are living, and contemporarily as a product of the human mind. Eco-field is defined a ‘cognitive field’ created by the interference between functional traits and the ‘real world’. Species-specific environmental suitability is the result of the quality of the different eco-fields and the landscape becomes a cognitive entity. The eco-field paradigm can be extended to the emergent properties of the systems. The eco-field of emergences is the geographic space in which the emergent properties appear. The eco-field of organisms and the eco-field of emergences, like results of aggregated entities, have in common the multidimensionality of landscapes, refusing the vision of landscape like a neutral geographic matrix for organisms and processes.

87 citations


Cites background from "On semiosis, Umwelt, and semiospher..."

  • ...…by von Bertalanffy 1969; autopoietic organization by Maturana & Varela 1980; the biosemiotic model by Hoffmeyer 1997; and the ecosemiotic model by Kull 1998a,b; Noth 1998) but there are still many barriers between these theories, preventing the development of an integrated problem-solving…...

    [...]