TY - JOUR

T1 - Semiotic individuation and Ernst Cassirer’s challenge

AU - Hoffmeyer, Jesper

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - The concept of individuation has suffered from its being mostly connected with Jungian psychology or nominalist philosophy. In this paper, “individuation” will be understood rather as a process; and in particular, as a series of stages (morphological and/or cognitive) that an organism passes through during its lifespan. In most species, individuation is restricted to a short period in early life, as when birds acquire their species specific songs; while in humans e and a few other species of birds or mammals (although to a much lesser degree) e individuation is a life-long, open-ended process. In this understanding, individuation becomes narrowly connected to learning. And since learning necessarily depends on what is already learned, the trajectory of learning-based individuation is necessarily indefinite and dependent on the concrete chance events and steps whereby the process has proceeded. Semiotic individuation is ahistorical process, and this fact explains why systems biology, as established by Ludwig van Bertalanffy, has not been capable of meeting the hope, expressed long ago by Ernst Cassirer, of bridging the mechanicist-vitalist gap in biology. Instead, a semiotic approach is called for. Human individuation, moreover, is special in a very important sense: language use implies that humans from earliest childhood inescapably become entangled in an 'as-if-world', a virtual reality, a story about who we are and how our life ‘here and now’ belongs within our own life-history, as well as within the greater pattern of the world around us. Human individuation is thus a double-tracked process, consisting in an incessant reconciliation or negotiation between the virtual reality that we have constructed in our minds and mind-independent reality as it impresses itself upon our lives. Human life cannot therefore be defined by its uniqueness as a particular genetic combination, but must be instead be defined by its uniqueness as a temporal outcome of semiotic individuation. Accordingly, this doubletrackedcharacter of human semiotic individuation implies that it is cast as just one particular outcome of a combinatorics with an infinite number of possible outcomes.

AB - The concept of individuation has suffered from its being mostly connected with Jungian psychology or nominalist philosophy. In this paper, “individuation” will be understood rather as a process; and in particular, as a series of stages (morphological and/or cognitive) that an organism passes through during its lifespan. In most species, individuation is restricted to a short period in early life, as when birds acquire their species specific songs; while in humans e and a few other species of birds or mammals (although to a much lesser degree) e individuation is a life-long, open-ended process. In this understanding, individuation becomes narrowly connected to learning. And since learning necessarily depends on what is already learned, the trajectory of learning-based individuation is necessarily indefinite and dependent on the concrete chance events and steps whereby the process has proceeded. Semiotic individuation is ahistorical process, and this fact explains why systems biology, as established by Ludwig van Bertalanffy, has not been capable of meeting the hope, expressed long ago by Ernst Cassirer, of bridging the mechanicist-vitalist gap in biology. Instead, a semiotic approach is called for. Human individuation, moreover, is special in a very important sense: language use implies that humans from earliest childhood inescapably become entangled in an 'as-if-world', a virtual reality, a story about who we are and how our life ‘here and now’ belongs within our own life-history, as well as within the greater pattern of the world around us. Human individuation is thus a double-tracked process, consisting in an incessant reconciliation or negotiation between the virtual reality that we have constructed in our minds and mind-independent reality as it impresses itself upon our lives. Human life cannot therefore be defined by its uniqueness as a particular genetic combination, but must be instead be defined by its uniqueness as a temporal outcome of semiotic individuation. Accordingly, this doubletrackedcharacter of human semiotic individuation implies that it is cast as just one particular outcome of a combinatorics with an infinite number of possible outcomes.

KW - Faculty of Science

KW - Semiotics

KW - Individuation

KW - Cassirer

KW - semiotic freedom

KW - evolution

KW - Semiotic individuation

KW - Ernst Cassirer

KW - biosemiotics

KW - evolution

KW - entenntionality

U2 - 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2015.06.017

DO - 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2015.06.017

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 26143496

VL - 119

SP - 607

EP - 615

JO - Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology

JF - Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology

SN - 0079-6107

IS - 3

ER -