Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:



Displaying: 31-40 of 893 documents


legacy and memory
31. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 34 > Issue: 1/2
Farouk Y. Seif Imaginary Dialogue with John Deely: Playing with Boundaries Across Space and Time
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
We live in a world of fact and a world of fancy, in the Peircean sense, telling real and imagined stories. In this Imaginary Dialogue with John Deely I compose narratives that integrate actual quotations from his seminal work and imaginative interpretation of our numerous conversations that took place over the years. Visiting John in May 2016 at the Latrobe Hospital and grieving his passing on January 7, 2017 were two cathartic and emancipating experiences that developed into this dialogical narrative as a commemorative manifestation of the exceptional life and the remarkable oeuvre of John Deely. It is inconceivable to separate Deely’s personal traits from his scholarly contributions as a great philosopher, semiotician, and a compassionate human being who not only graciously persevered through the semiotic paradox of life and death, but also gregariously played with many boundaries across space and time.
32. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 34 > Issue: 1/2
Myrdene Anderson Another Page for “Between the Sheets”: Homage to John Deely’s “Historical Layering”
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Among John Deely’s many gifts to the Semiotic Society of America, perhaps his greatest is the SSA Style Sheet (1985, 1986) and its mandate for “historical layering”. Here I provide further reflection on some aspects of the art, craft, and science of bibliography, commemorating Deely and resuscitating the torturous birth of the SSA Style Sheet. I then summarize Deely’s compulsive defense of “historical layering” and relate his final amendment to the Style Sheet.
33. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 34 > Issue: 1/2
Martin Švantner, Michal Karľa John Deely’s Influence on Prague Semiotics
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In this paper, we give account of how the present shift in thought of the Prague School of Semiotics towards the history of semiotics (including, perhaps most notably, the exegesis of Peirce’s work) has been initiated and shaped by the ideas of John Deely. We discuss how works of John Deely were “discovered” in Prague, and how they found their way into our scholarly work and curriculum. We concentrate on the two Deely’s ideas which influenced us the most: his method of the “archaeology of concepts” applicable to the study of the history of semiotics, and his historical account of what constitutes a sign in its proper being, which not only makes semiotics and its historiography possible, but also advances a new conception of philosophy considered as semiotics.
epilogue
34. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 34 > Issue: 1/2
Christopher S. Morrissey John Deely (1942–2017), A Philosopher’s Life
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
35. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 34 > Issue: 1/2
About the Authors
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
36. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 33 > Issue: 3/4
Richard L. Lanigan Cassirer on Communicology: The Symbolic Forms of Language, Art, Myth, and Religion in Cultural Semiotics
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
articles
37. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 33 > Issue: 3/4
Göran Sonesson Beyond the “Tragedy of Culture”: In-between Epistemology and Communication
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Spelling out the more or less implicit phenomenology found in Peirce’s categories and in the “Basisphänomene” suggested by the late Cassirer, this paper attempts to extend Cassirer’s own suggestion for the grounding of the human, or, as we prefer to say, semiotic, sciences, by means of an elucidation of the components of the basic situation of communication, revised on the basis of the Prague school approach to semiotics. In the first part of the paper, we consider Cassirer’s proposal for a theory of science, in the light of both the first scholarly discussion of the theme, involving Rickert, Windelbrand and Dilthey, and the second round, initiated by Gadamer and Habermas, while drawing final conclusions from the surreptitious results of the advent of Structuralism, in which Cassirer was a somewhat unheeding player. In the second part of the paper, the semiotic sciences are tentatively grounded in the sciences of normalcy, the epitome of which is Husserl’s science of the Lifeworld, presenting the different “Basisphänomene” as being the foundation for three fundamental epistemological operations, derived from the act of communication, which are all necessary to the deployment of the semiotic sciences.
38. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 33 > Issue: 3/4
Richard L. Lanigan Ernst Cassirer’s Theory and Application of Communicology: From Husserl via Bühler to Jakobson
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The Human Science of Communicology culminates from several disciplinary developments, largely viewed as singular constitutions and foundational to differential attitudes about the nature and function of philosophy and science in apposition (triadic relation) to human embodiment. In more familiar terms, the idea of Culture stands in contrast to the idea of Science, because there is a measured distinction between what human beings express and what they perceive. In Modernity, we know this apposition (Human–Culture–Science) as the emergence of (1) the distinct cultural disciplines (expression of human embodiment) over against the (2) the distinct scientific disciplines (perception of physical nature). Ernst Cassirer explores this problematic in The Logic of the Cultural Sciences (1942) where he distinguishes Culture as the perception-of-expression and Science as the perception-of-objects. Cassirer’s thematic explication is to be found in The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms (1923–1996) where his semiotic phenomenology of human communication is articulated in detail such that Science is bracketed by Culture. In Cassirer’s terms of symbolic forms, we can distinguish the semiotic distinction among (1) the Perception of Expression (Culture) where (a) Myth (Langage) and (b) Knowledge (Parole) contrast with (2) the Perception of Objects (Science) in the form of (c) Speech (Langue) and (d) Art (Discours). Symbols are constitutive of social semiotics (sensuous expression) and the intersubjective phenomenology of human embodiment (intuitive expression) in the tradition of Immanuel Kant and Edmund Husserl.
39. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 33 > Issue: 3/4
Eric M. Kramer Cassirer as Revolutionary: Semiotics as Embodied Worldview: Appreciating the Other in Ourselves
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This article examines the meaning of interactive comportment as identified by Richard Lanigan and the role fundamental analysis of this facticity (communicology) can play in improving social life. The role of communicology as exposed by this non-naïve sense of responsibility is examined. The contribution of Ernst Cassirer’s work on symbology generally, and the primitive more specifically, is explored as a case that supports Lanigan’s assertion that fundamental examination of comportment can expand our understanding of ourselves and others, facilitate tolerance, foster creativity, and enrich our lives. Rigorous examination and appreciation of comportment, including the relationship between identity and difference, has implications for, and reverberates throughout, the lifeworld. A non-naïve understanding that social studies take place within a social environment and have consequences for that environment prompts us to self-consciously interrogate the implications of such work for life. Cassirer’s work demonstrates the potential for communicology to facilitate change.
40. The American Journal of Semiotics: Volume > 33 > Issue: 3/4
Rolf-Dieter Hepp Epistemological and Symbolic Aspects of Sociological Thinking
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Considering different aspects of society such as identity, entity, and totality seems to be an integral object of social science research which offers specific configurations of and for symbols and signs. They are tools for decoding and deciphering the social quadratic structure of Self—Other, combined with, Similarity—Difference. If these semiotic comparisons are based on communicated Language, particularly when examined from the point of view of a symbolic pervasion and permeation of power, then we can see that normal thought patterns (hexis) loose their natural coherence in practice (habitus). As Jaques Lacan points out by referring to the unconscious, first of all Language (langue) has to assure itself of its object (sign/parole) in order to be able to develop its analytic pattern (symbol/discours). In this communicative context taking the term field as an example, Bourdieu shows how socially accepted terms are applied in an uncontrolled way (illusio) without being examined thoroughly (as contingent and precarious indexical referents), thus gaining system access (rhetoric as practical logic) to the production of social knowledge (ideology) in a given culture.