Toward a Truly Pragmatic Theory of Signs: Reading Peirce's Semeiotic in Light of Dewey's Gloss (original) (raw)

Peirce, Eco, and the Pragmatic Theory of Signs

European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, 2018

An argument that both Peirce and Eco sought a "truly general" theory of signs and how that aim coincides with the aims of pragmatism. It is shown how Peirce's and Eco's ideas about abduction tie their projects together.

Auxier.Eco, Peirce, and the Pragmatic Theory of Signs

European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy

Auxier argues that the quest for a truly general semiotics is an important point of contact between C.S. Peirce and Umberto Eco. While Peirce was not a philosopher of culture, as Eco was, this difference is superficial when it comes to comparing the operations the posit for signs, insofar as they convey meanings. Auxier shows they are both pragmatists in a similar sense, and Auxier situates Eco's nominalism against a wider backdrop of a process metaphysics Eco did not reject. In the end, Auxier argues that the need for a truly general theory of signs, or unlimited semiosis (as Eco calls it), requires some limitations that can be found in the definition and limits of the sign. It requires that signs be taken in their form of being, not just in their functions in the philosophy of culture. Auxier here provides a philosophical history of philosophy as an exercise in the philosophy of culture.

C. S. Peirce’s Dialogical Conception of Sign Processes

Studies in Philosophy and Education, 2005

This article examines the contention that the central concepts of C. S. Peirce's semeiotic are inherently communicational. It is argued that the Peircean approach avoids the pitfalls of objectivism and constructivism, rendering the sign-user neither a passive recipient nor an omnipotent creator of meaning. Consequently, semeiotic may serve as a useful general framework for studies of learning processes.

THE SECRET OF RENDERING SIGNS EFFECTIVE: THE IMPORT OF C. S. PEIRCE'S SEMIOTIC RHETORIC

Summary: In this article, I trace the historical development of Peirce's semiotic rhetoric from its early appearance as a sub-discipline of symbolistic to its mature incarnation as one of the three main branches of the science of semiotic, and argue that this change in status is a symptom of Peirce's broadening semiotic interest. The scope and character of the mature discipline of rhetoric is discussed in terms of a possible clash between rhetorical and methodological emphases, and a conciliatory strategy is suggested. The article concludes with some reflections on the relevance of Peircean rhetoric for future work in Peirce studies and semiotics.

On Signs and Objects. Historical and Interpretative Perspectives on Peirce's Mature Doctrine of the Dynamic and Immediate Objects of the Sign

2020

This work investigates and reconstructs the historical and theoretical development of the Peircean distinction between Dynamic and Immediate Object. This dichotomy has been too hastily interpreted and adopted by certain contemporary semiotics as the theoretical tool by means of which Peirce explains the difference between representation and reality, although from his writings it clearly emerges that the aims of the dichotomy were others. Through the analysis of some key texts we will then try to reconstruct the internal articulation and the development of this doctrine in the thought of its creator, underlining that it was an instrument for the classification of signs, useful to distinguish them according to their ways of denotation (but not only) and thus highlighting how some of the cornerstones of the "standard interpretation" of such a dichotomy are to be abandoned or, at least, reviewed and problematized. --- Lo scopo di questo lavoro è quello di indagare e ricostruire lo sviluppo storico e teoretico della distinzione peirceana tra Oggetto Dinamico e Oggetto Immediato. Questa dicotomia è stata troppo frettolosamente interpretata e adottata da certa semiotica contemporanea come lo strumento teorico capace di rendere ragione della differenza fra realtà e rappresentazione sebbene dal confronto con gli scritti di Peirce emerga chiaramente come i suoi scopi fossero altri. Attraverso l’analisi di alcuni testi-chiave cercheremo allora di ricostruire l’articolazione interna e lo sviluppo di questa dicotomia nel pensiero del suo ideatore, sottolineando come essa fosse uno strumento per la classificazione dei segni, utile a distinguerli secondo i loro modi della denotazione (ma non solo) ed evidenziando, dunque, come alcuni capisaldi della "interpretazione standard" di questa dottrina siano da abbandonare o, quantomeno, da rivedere e problematizzare.

Understanding sign semiosis as cognition and as self-conscious process: A reconstruction of some basic conceptions in Peirce’s semiotics

Semiotica, 1990

In this paper I will deal with some basic conceptions of semioticsmainly with the nature, the structure, and the evolution of Semiosis. Thus the nature of Sign and its function in the structure of the Semiotic process is the hero of this story. In the framework of this paper I will discuss semiotics in its widest sense: namely, not only as a theory of signs and philosophy of language, but also as a philosophy of cognition and mind. This extension of the conception of Semiosis comes, upon my interpretation, as a natural conclusion of the reconstruction of Peirce's pragmaticist philosophy. There is a strong inclination among some semioticians, philosophers, psychologists, biologists, and others (including physicists) to understand every natural phenomenon, either physical or psychical, as a Sign process, and therefore as a Semiosis. In doing so they seem to be identifying the structures of the physical processes they study with the structure of their own cognition, in which they interpret in Signs those former processes. Such enterprises follow the path of cybernetics, information theory, and computer science in understanding physical processes in terms of 'sign',