In Vinicius Romanini (ed.), Peirce and Biosemiotics (2014)
AbstractThis chapter presents a detailed explanation of Peirce’s early and late views on semiotic indeterminacy and then considers how those views might be applied within biosemiotics. Peirce distinguished two different forms of semiotic indeterminacy: generality and vagueness. He defined each in terms of the “right” that indeterminate signs extend, either to their interpreters in the case of generality or to their utterers in the case of vagueness, to further determine their meaning. On Peirce’s view, no sign is absolutely determinate, i.e., every sign is indeterminate to at least some degree and so exhibits some degree of generality or vagueness. If Peirce was right about this, then no instance of biosemiosis is completely determinate—every biosign must be general or vague to some degree. I show that on Peirce’s view, whether a sign is general or vague depends on its immediate object, “the idea which the sign is built upon,” and I explain how Peirce would go about identifying the immediate object of a sign lacking both a minded utterer and a minded interpreter—an identification that must be possible if any biosign is indeterminate.
Similar books and articles
Peirce on the Indeterminate and on the Object: Initial Reflections.Jay Zeman - 1988 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 32 (1):37-49.
Some Early‐Modern Discussions of Vagueness: Locke, Leibniz, Kant.Steven Tester - 2014 - Philosophy Compass 9 (1):33-44.
Toward a Concept of Pluralistic, Inter-Relational Semiosis.Floyd Merrell - 2007 - Sign Systems Studies 35 (1-2):9-68.
Why and How to Naturalize Semiotic Concepts for Biosemiotics.Tommi Vehkavaara - 2002 - Sign Systems Studies 30 (1):293-312.
On Peirce’s Early Realism.Robert Lane - 2004 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 40 (4):575 - 605.
In Defence of the Sensible Theory of Indeterminacy.Harold W. Noonan - 2013 - Metaphysica 14 (2):239-252.
Creativity: Self-Referential Mistaking, Not Negating. [REVIEW]Victoria N. Alexander - 2013 - Biosemiotics 6 (2):253-272.
What Does It Take to Produce Interpretation? Informational, Peircean and Code-Semiotic Views on Biosemiotics.Søren Brier & Cliff Joslyn - 2013 - Biosemiotics 6 (1):143-159.
Vagueness as Indeterminacy.Brian Weatherson - 2010 - In Richard Dietz & Sebastiano Moruzzi (eds.), Cuts and Clouds: Vaguenesss, its Nature and its Logic. Oxford University Press.
Worldly Indeterminacy: A Rough Guide.Nicholas J. J. Smith & Gideon Rosen - 2004 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (1):185 – 198.
Ambiguity, Generality, and Indeterminacy: Tests and Definitions. [REVIEW]Brendan S. Gillon - 1990 - Synthese 85 (3):391 - 416.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Some Challenges to the Evolutionary Status of Semiosis.Claudio Julio Rodríguez Higuera - 2019 - Biosemiotics 12 (3):405-421.
References found in this work
How Monkeys See the World: Inside the Mind of Another Species.Dorothy L. Cheney & Robert M. Seyfarth - 1990 - University of Chicago Press.
Order Out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature.I. Prigogine - 1984 - Random House.