Codes: Necessary, but not Sufficient for Meaning-Making

Kull, Kalevi

Volume 15 · Number 2 · Pages 137–139

< Previous Paper · Next Paper >

Codes: Necessary, but not Sufficient for Meaning-Making

Kalevi Kull

Abstract

Open peer commentary on the article “A Critique of Barbieri’s Code Biology” by Alexander V. Kravchenko. Abstract: One of the main problems of biosemiotics, i.e., the distinction between code-based artifacts and (meaning-making) life itself, does not seem to be resolved yet. Semiosis requires codes but it cannot be based on a single code. I sketch a model that demonstrates the role of codes in semiosis and helps to see correspondences between the models of Peirce and Saussure.

Handling Editor: Alexander Riegler

Citation

Kull K. (2020) Codes: Necessary, but not sufficient for meaning-making. Constructivist Foundations 15(2): 137–139. https://constructivist.info/15/2/137

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)

References

Barbieri M. (2001) The organic codes: The birth of semantic biology. peQuod editore, Ancona. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Barbieri M. (2015) Code biology: A new science of life. Springer, Cham. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Champagne M. (2009) A note on M. Barbieri’s “scientific biosemiotics.” The American Journal of Semiotics 25(1/2): 155–161. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Cobley P. (2014) Codes and coding: Sebeok’s zoosemiotics and the dismantling of the fixed-code fallacy. Semiotica 198: 33–45. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Cobley P. (2016) Cultural implications of biosemiotics. Springer, Dordrecht. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Deacon T. (2015) Steps to a science of biosemiotics. Green Letters: Studies in Ecocriticism 19(3): 293–311. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Deely J. (2009) Pars pro toto from culture to nature: An overview of semiotics as a postmodern development, with an anticipation of developments to come. The American Journal of Semiotics 25(1/2): 167–192. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Eco U. (1976) A theory of semiotics. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Eco U. (1986) Semiotics and the philosophy of language. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Gamow G. (1954) Possible relation between deoxyribonucleic acid and protein structures. Nature 173: 318. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Gare A. (2019) Biosemiosis and causation: Defending biosemiotics through Rosen’s theoretical biology; or, integrating biosemiotics and anticipatory systems theory. Cosmos and History 15(1): 31–90. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Hoffmeyer J. & Emmeche C. (1991) Code-duality and the semiotics of nature. In: Anderson M. & Merrell F. (eds.) On semiotic modeling. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin: 117–166. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Kull K. (1998) On semiosis, umwelt, and semiosphere. Semiotica 120(3/4): 299–310. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Kull K. (2015) Semiosis stems from logical incompatibility in organic nature: Why biophysics does not see meaning, while biosemiotics does. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 119(3): 616–621. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Kull K. (2016) Habits – semioses – habits. Sign Systems Studies 44(4): 623–629. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Kull K. (2018) Choosing and learning: Semiosis means choice. Sign Systems Studies 46(4): 452–466. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Lotman J. (1990) Universe of the mind. Tauris, London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Markoš A. (2010) Biosemiotics and the collision of modernism with postmodernity. Cognitio 11(1): 69–78. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Peirce C. S. (1976) The new elements of mathematics by Charles S. Peirce: Volume 4: Mathematical philosophy. Edited by C. Eisele. Mouton Publishers, The Hague. Originally published in 1902. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Rodríguez Higuera C. J. (2019) Everything seems so settled here: The conceivability of post-Peircean biosemiotics. Sign Systems Studies 47(3/4): 420–435. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Sakellariou P. (2019) The semiotic concept of code: A study in concept formation. Postdoctoral Dissertation. Ionian University, Corfu. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Saussure F. de (1959) Course in general linguistics. Edited by C. Bally & A. Sechehaye. Translated by W. Baskin. Philosophical Library, New York. Originally published in 1916. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Schrödinger E. (1944) What is life? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Vega F. (2018) A critique of Barbieri’s code biology through Rosen’s relational biology: Reconciling Barbieri’s biosemiotics with Peircean biosemiotics. Biological Theory 13: 261–279. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Comments: 0

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.

LATEST ISSUES

FOLLOW US

Abstract

Citation

References

Comments: 0