Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
References
All Topics
Psychology
Cognitive Science

Consciousness, semiosis, and the unbinding problem

Profile image of Joel ParthemoreJoel Parthemore

2017, Language & Communication

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANGCOM.2016.10.004
visibility

…

description

23 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

This is the accepted version of a paper published in Language & Communication. This paper has been peer-reviewed but does not include the final publisher proof-corrections or journal pagination.

Related papers

Communication as Navigation: A New Role for Consciousness in Language
Erica Cosentino

Topoi, 2014

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media Dordrecht. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com".

View PDFchevron_right
Embodiment at the Crossroads between Cognition and Semiosis
patrizia violi

Recherches en Communication, 2003

View PDFchevron_right
Consciousness and the state/transitive/creature distinction
Russ McBride

Philosophical Psychology, 1999

A BS TRA C T This essay examines the gramm atical structure underlying the use of the word ª consciousº. Despite the existence of this gram matical structure, I reject the assumption that actual consciousness has a similar structure. Speci® cally, I reject the claim that consciousness consists of three subtypes: state consciousness, transitive consciousness, and creature consciousness. I offer an inductive argument and a deductive argum ent that no such psychological entities exist. The inductive argument: given the lack of evidence or arguments for the entities and given that a tripartite consciousness structure evolved from a tripartite grammatical habit, it w ould be far too coincidental if the gram matical distinction mirrored a psychological distinction. The deductive argum ent (a reductio ad absurdum) shows that absurd conclusions follow from assum ing the existence of three distinct psychological entities. Furthermore, the verbal habits that m otivate the distinction are rendered more intelligible under a ª Unitary Thesisº , the idea that verbal distinctions involving use of the w ord ª consciousº are uni® ed in their reliance on a single ontological unit, that of conscious experience. Language has m any properties which are not shared by things in general, and when these properties intrude into our m etaphysic it becom es altogether misleading.

View PDFchevron_right
On a cognitive model of semiosis
Piotr Konderak

2015

What is the class of possible semiotic systems? What kinds of systems could count as such systems? The human mind is naturally considered the prototypical semiotic system. During years of research in semiotics the class has been broadened to include i.e. living systems (Zlatev, 2002) like animals, or even plants (Krampen, 1992). It is suggested in the literature on artificial intelligence that artificial agents are typical examples of symbol-processing entities. It also seems that (at least some) semiotic processes are in fact cognitive processes. In consequence, it is natural to ask the question about the relation between semiotic studies and research on artificial cognitive systems within cognitive science. Consequently, my main question concerns the problem of inclusion or exclusion from the semiotic spectrum at least some artificial (computational) systems. I would like to consider some arguments against the possibility of artificial semiotic systems and I will try to repeal them. Then I will present an existing natural-language using agent of the SNePS system and interpret it in terms of Peircean theory of signs. I would like also to show that some properties of semiotic systems in Peircean sense could be also found in a discussed artificial system. Finally, I will have some remarks on the status of semiotics in general.

View PDFchevron_right
The dialectics of consciousness and language
Jordan Zlatev

Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2008

View PDFchevron_right
Understanding Consciousness Using Systems Approaches and Lexical Universals
Michael J . Winkelman

Anthropology of Consciousness 15(2): 24-38., 2005

The numerous perspectives offered on consciousness reflect a multifaceted phenomenon that results from a system of relations. An etymological approach identifies linguistic roots of the meanings of consciousness and illustrates their concern with self-referenced informational relationships of an organism with its environment, a "knowing system" formed in the epistemological relations between knower and known. Common elements of contemporary models suggest that consciousness involves interacting components of a system, including: attention-awareness; phenomenal experiences; self reference; action-behavior, including representations and learning; use of information; interpretation of meaning; goal-directed behavior; and systems of social reference. It is suggested that manifestations of consciousness through the physical properties of the brain are universally represented in language. A preliminary systems model of consciousness is outlined with widespread lexical roots proposed as a culture-neutral framework for constructing theories of consciousness and identifying cognitive constructs which reveal the epistemological roots of consciousness within Indo-European traditions. key words: Consciousness, Epistemology, Linguistics, Theory introduction The study of consciousness is fragmented by diverse definitions, types, meanings, and models (see . Theoretical ideas regarding the nature of consciousness are so diverse that one is reminded of the Sufi parable of the seven blind men and the elephant, each holding on to a different piece and each with a dramatically different idea regarding the nature of the beast they have encountered.

View PDFchevron_right
Methodological Problems of the Linguistic Philosophy of Consciousness
Pavel N . Baryshnikov

RUDN Journal of Philosophy, 2011

Methodological issues of modern linguistic philosophy of consciousness are discussed in the article. A number of points of modern analytic philosophy of consciousness are considered and one can understand the whole complexity of the issue of correlation of mental and physical processes concerning the linguistic aspect. We pay much attention to the linguistic nature of intentionality and to the problem of reference; and we also describe intentional ambivalence of semiotisation of sensory experience.

View PDFchevron_right
Consciousness is cybernetic and semantic
miroslav dyer

In this essay, we attempt to demonstrate several key things-1. We are guided by the following reasoning methods-Occam's razor (simplicity), Holmes Shroud (falsifiability), and Alan Newell's Unified Theories of Cognition (teleology, basically goal-orientation, guides all real computation, there is no way to design a computer that doesn't solve some problem) This

View PDFchevron_right
Language and Consciousness; How Language Implies Self-awareness
Mehran Shaghaghi

The relationship between language and consciousness has been debated since ancient times, but the details have never been fully articulated. Certainly, there are animals that possess the same essential auditory and vocal systems as humans, but acquiring language is seemingly uniquely human. In this essay, we investigate the relationship between language and consciousness by demonstrating how language usage implies the self-awareness of the user. We show that the self-awareness faculty encompasses the language faculty and how this self-awareness, that is uniquely human, enables us to create social realities through utilizing the social character of the language. We conclude that it is self-awareness that empowers humans to form collective intentionality and to structure societies. Establishing the relationship between self-awareness, language and society sheds light on connections between philosophy of mind, philosophy of language and philosophy of society

View PDFchevron_right
Causal processes, semiosis, and consciousness
Claus Emmeche

Process theories: Crossdisciplinary studies in …, 2003

Abstract: The evolutionary emergence of biological processes in organisms with inner, qualitative aspects has not been explained in any sufficient way by neurobiology, nor by the traditional neo-Darwinian paradigm — natural selection would appear to work just as well on insentient zombies (with the right behavioral input-output relations) as on real sentient animals. In consciousness studies one talks about the ‘hard problem’ of qualia. In this paper I sketch a set of principles about sign action, causality and emergent evolution. On the basis of these principles, I characterize a concept of cause that would allow for a naturalistic explanation of the origin of consciousness. The suggested account of causation also turns the ‘hard problem’ of qualia into the easier problem of relating experimental biology to experiential biology.

View PDFchevron_right

References (77)

  1. B. Dainton, Coming together: The unity of conscious experience, in: M. Velmans, S. Schneider (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion To Conscious- ness, John Wiley And Sons, 2007, Ch. 16, pp. 209-222.
  2. M. Donald, Origins Of The Modern Mind: Three Stages in The Evolution Of Culture And Cognition, Harvard University Press, 1993.
  3. J. Parthemore, Concepts enacted: Confronting the obstacles and paradoxes inherent in pursuing a scientific understanding of the building blocks of human thought, Ph.D. thesis, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, UK, http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/6954/ (Accessed 24 April 2016). (2011).
  4. G. Sonesson, Semiosis beyond signs: On a two or three missing links on the way to human beings, http://project.sol.lu.se/fileadmin/user_upload/project/ccs/Semiosis_beyond_signs.pdf (2009).
  5. S. Lenninger, When does similarity qualify as a sign? a study in picture understanding af semiotic development in young children, Ph.D. thesis, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden (2012).
  6. J. Zlatev, Meaning = life (+ culture), Evolution of Communication 4 (2) (2002) 253-296.
  7. A. Clark, D. Chalmers, The extended mind, Analysis 58 (1) (1998) 7-19.
  8. A. Clark, Supersizing The Mind: Embodiment, Action, And Cognitive Extension, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2008.
  9. J. Parthemore, A cognitive semiotic perspective on the nature and limita- tions of concepts and conceptual frameworks, in: P. Konderak, J. Zlatev, G. Sonnesson (Eds.), Meaning, Mind and Communication: Studies in Cog- nitive Semiotics, Peter Lang, 2016, Ch. 3, in press.
  10. J. Parthemore, A. F. Morse, Representations reclaimed: Accounting for the co-emergence of concepts and experience, Pragmatics & Cognition 18 (2) (2010) 273-312.
  11. J. Levine, Anti-materialist arguments and influential replies, in: S. Schnei- der, M. Velmans (Eds.), Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, Blackwell, 2007, Ch. 29, pp. 371-380.
  12. S. Blackmore, Consciousness: An Introduction, 2nd Edition, Routledge, 2010.
  13. T. Nagel, What is it like to be a bat?, Philosophical Review 84 (4) (1974) 435-450.
  14. N. Block, How many concepts of consciousness?, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (2) (1995) 272-287.
  15. J. Searle, Biological naturalism, in: S. Schneider, M. Velmans (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, Blackwell, 2007, Ch. 25, pp. 325- 334.
  16. D. J. Chalmers, Facing up to the hard problem of consciousness, Journal of Consciousness Studies 2 (3) (1995) 200-219.
  17. J. Zlatev, Cognitive Semiotics and Language: Evolution, Development and Embodiment, Bloomsbury, 2016, in press.
  18. J. Zlatev, The semiotic hierarchy: Life, consciousness, signs and language, Cognitive Semiotics 2009 (4) (2009) 169-200.
  19. Z. Torey, The Crucible Of Consciousness: An Integrated Theory Of Mind And Brain, MIT Press, 2009.
  20. D. C. Dennett, Kinds of Minds: The Origins of Consciousness, Basic Books, 2008.
  21. D. C. Dennett, Animal consciousness and why it matters, Social Research 52 (1995) 691-710.
  22. S. Gallagher, Phenomenological approaches to consciousness, in: M. Vel- mans, S. Schneider (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, John Wiley, 2007, Ch. 53, pp. 686-696.
  23. G. G. Gallup, Self recognition in primates: A comparative approach to the bidirection properties of consciousness, American Psychologist 32 (5) (1977) 329-338.
  24. J. George G. Gallup, Chimpanzees: Self recognition, Science 167 (3914) (1970) 86-87.
  25. H. Prior, A. Schwarz, O. Güntürkün, Mirror-inducetd behavior in the magpie (pica pica): Evidence of self-recognition, PlLoS Biology 6 (8) (2008) e202, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060202 (accessed 23 July 2016).
  26. J. Plotnik, F. de Waal, D. Reiss, Self-recognition in an asian elephant, Pro- ceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (45) (2006) 17053-17057, http://www.pnas.org/content/103/45/17053 (accessed 23 July 2016).
  27. D. Reiss, L. Marino, Mirror self-recognition in the bottlenose dolphin: A case of cognitive convergence, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98 (10) (2000) 5937-5942, http://www.pnas.org/content/98/10/5937.full?ref=nf (accessed 23 July 2016).
  28. S. Pinker, P. Bloom, Natural language and natural selection, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13 (4) (1990) 707-784.
  29. N. Chomsky, Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lec- tures, Vol. 16 of Current Studies in Linguistics, MIT Press, 1988.
  30. S. J. Gould, The limits of adaptation: Is language a spandrel of the hu- man brain?, paper presented to the cognitive science seminar, Center for Cognitive Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (October 1987).
  31. S. J. Gould, R. Lewontin, The spandrels of san marco and the panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 205 (1979) 281-288.
  32. T. Polger, Rethinking the evolution of consciousness, in: M. Velmans, S. Schneider (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, John Wi- ley and Sons, 2007, Ch. 5, pp. 72-86.
  33. G. Ryle, The Concept Of Mind, Penguin, London, 1949.
  34. P. Gärdenfors, Conceptual Spaces: The Geometry of Thought, Bradford Books, 2004.
  35. J. Parthemore, Specification of the unified conceptual space, for purposes of empirical investigation, in: F. Zenker, P. Gärdenfors (Eds.), Applications of Conceptual Spaces: The Case for Geometric Knowledge Representation, Springer, 2015.
  36. J. Parthemore, The unified conceptual space theory: An enactive theory of concepts, Adaptive Behavior 21 (3) (2013) 168-177.
  37. I. Harvey, Untimed and misrepresented: Connectionism and the computer metaphor, cSRP 245 (1992).
  38. M. Osvath, E. Karvonen, Spontaneous innovation for fu- ture deception in a male chimpanzee, PLoS one 7 (5), http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036782 (accessed 23 July 2016).
  39. M. Osvath, Planning primates: A search for episodic foresight, Ph.D. thesis, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden (May 2010).
  40. M. Osvath, Spontaneous planning for future stone throwing by a male chimpanzee, Current Biology 19 (2009) R190-R191.
  41. D. Marr, Vision: A computational investigation into the human represen- tation and processing of visual information, Henry Holt & Company, San Francisco, 1982.
  42. D. C. Dennett, Consciousness Explained, Little, Brown, 1991.
  43. D. Vernon, R. Lowe, S. Thill, T. Ziemke, Embodied cognition and circular causality: On the role of constitutive autonomy in the re- ciprocal coupling of perception and action, Frontiers in Psycholo- gyHttp://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01660/full (accessed 24 July 2016).
  44. J. Parthemore, From a sensorimotor to a sensorimotor++ account of em- bodied conceptual cognition, in: J. M. Bishop, A. O. Martin (Eds.), Con- temporary Sensorimotor Theory:, Vol. 15 of Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology, and Applied Ethics, Springer, 2014, Ch. 10, pp. 137-158.
  45. J. Parthemore, Conceptual change and development on multiple time scales: From incremental evolution to origins, Sign Systems Studies 42 (2/3) (2014) 193-218.
  46. W. P. Banks, S. Pockett, Benjamin libet's work on the neuroscience of free will, in: S. Schneider, M. Velmans (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, Blackwell, 2007, Ch. 51, pp. 657-670.
  47. B. Libet, Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 8 (4) (1985) 529-566.
  48. R. A. Brooks, Intelligence without reason, in: Proceedings, IJCAI-91, Mor- gan Kaufmann, 1991.
  49. J. M. Bishop, A. O. Martin (Eds.), Contemporary Sensorimotor Theory, Vol. 15 of Sturies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, Springer, London, 2014.
  50. J. K. O'Regan, A. Noë, A sensorimotor account of vision and visual con- sciousness, Beha 24 (2001) 939-1031.
  51. J. Levine, Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap, Pacific Philosoph- ical Quarterly 64 (1983) 354-361.
  52. M. Tye, Consciousness and Persons: Unity and Identity, MIT Press, 2003.
  53. A. Gurwitsch, A non-egological conception of consciousness, Phi- losophy And Phenomenological Research 1 (3) (1941) 325-338. doi:10.2307/2102762.
  54. J. Parthemore, B. Whitby, What makes any agent a moral agent? reflec- tions on machine consciousness and moral agency, International Journal of Machine Consciousness 5 (2) (2013) 105-129.
  55. G. Evans, Varieties of Reference, Clarendon Press, 1982.
  56. A. Newen, A. Bartels, Animal minds and the possession of concepts, Philo- sophical Psychology 20 (3) (2007) 283-308.
  57. C. Allen, Animal concepts revisited: The use of self-monitoring as an em- pirical approach, Erkenntnis 51 (1) (1999) 33-40.
  58. C. Allen, M. Bekoff, Animal consciousness, in: M. Velmans, S. Schneider (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, John Wiley and Sons, 2007, Ch. 4, pp. 58-71.
  59. J. Parthemore, The case for protoconcepts: Why concepts, language, and protolanguage all need protoconcepts, Theoria et Historia Scientiarum 11 (2014) 159-178.
  60. G. Tononi, Consciousness as integrated information: A provisional mani- festo, The Biological Bulletin 215 (3) (2008) 216-242.
  61. E. Husserl, The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phe- nomenology: An Introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy, Northwest- ern University Press, 1970, tr. David Carr.
  62. T. Kuhn, The road since structure, in: PSA: Proceedings Of The Biennial Meeting Of The Philosophy Of Science Association, Vol. 2 of 1990, 1990, pp. 3-13.
  63. T. Kuhn, The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions, University Of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1970.
  64. H. Maturana, Cognition, in: P. M. Hejl, W. K. Köck, G. Roth (Eds.), Wahrnehmung Und Kommunikation, Peter Lang, Frankfurt, 1978, pp. 29- 49, available online at http://www.enolagaia.com/M78bCog.html, with the original page numbering retained.
  65. H. R. Maturana, F. J. Varela, The Tree Of Knowledge: The Biological Roots Of Human Understanding, Shambhala, London, 1992.
  66. F. J. Varela, E. Thompson, E. Rosch, The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience, MIT Press, 1991.
  67. E. Thompson, Mind in Life: Biology, Phenomenology and the Sciences of Mind, Harvard University Press, 2007.
  68. H. Maturana, F. J. Varela, Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1980.
  69. E. Di Paolo, Autopoiesis, adaptivity, teleology, agency, Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4 (4) (2005) 429-452.
  70. J. Stewart, Cognition = life: Implications for higher-level cognition, Be- havioural Processes 35 (1-3) (1995) 311-326.
  71. G. Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge and Three Dialogues, Oxford University Press, 1999.
  72. H. Atmanspacher, Dual-aspect monism a la pauli and jung, Journal of Consciousness Studies 19 (9-10) (2012) 96-120.
  73. B. Russell, Mathematical logic as based on the theory of types, American Journal Of Mathematics 30 (3) (1908) 222-262.
  74. K. D. Jolley, The Concept 'Horse' Paradox and Wittgensteinian Conceptual Investigations: A Prolegomenon to Philosophical Investigations, Ashgate, 2007.
  75. A. Bierce, The devil's dictionary, ebook: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/972, first published 1911. Published electronically by Project Gutenberg. (July 1997).
  76. P. Carruthers, Higher-order theories of consciousness, last accessed 22 August 2016. (September 2007). URL http://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/archives/win2008/ entries/consciousness-higher/.
  77. F. J. Varela, J. Shear, The View From Within: First-Person Approaches To The Study Of Consciousness, Imprint Academic, 1999.

Related papers

On Consciousness and Semiosis
Per Aage Brandt

I will here sketch out, in a basic model, based on simple schematic intuition, the contours of an elementary scenario of the content of consciousness in animals like ourselves. This model targets consciousness as I believe it evolved from mammals to primates to ourselves, and then develops content structure in basic human consciousness from simple being-awake to higher notions of self and reflexivity. It includes elementary narrative structure and builds on step by step complexification through increasing supply from memory and empathic information from other subjects. It leads toward an architecture of canonical levels of consciousness and self versions; and it takes us from constitutive semiotic structures to aesthetic and linguistic strata of 'being conscious'.

View PDFchevron_right
Consciousness and Self in Language . A View from Cognitive Semiotics
Ana Margarida Abrantes

2010

Consciousness is a subjective experience. To science it matters little whether there is an agent behind conscious experience – things like holding a belief, making a decision, remembering a person, attend to an object, act in a situation –; science (in this case neuroscience) is instead concerned with describing what processes in the brain are responsible for that experience. And yet we believe that we are agents of these experiences, that they are not the mechanical outcome of a series of such causal processes. This belief underlies and gives meaning to our individual existence and it is foundational to various aspects of social reality. When studying cognition and mental life, we cannot do without subjective experience. It may not be observable as its neural substrate is, but it is nonetheless real, as experience, and moreover reportable in a semiotic exchange, mediated, among other means, through language. Language, in turn, is hardly ever purely referential: instead language inv...

View PDFchevron_right
Semiosis without Consciousness? An ontogenetic perspective
patrizia violi

Cognitive Semiotics, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
Towards an integration of two aspects of semiosis -A cognitive semiotic perspective
Piotr Konderak

Sign System Studies, 2021

Meaning-making processes, understood hierarchically, in line with the Semiotic Hierarchy framework, change on various timescales. To account for and predict these changes, one can take a cognitive view on semiosis. I adopt an interdisciplinary approach combining semiotic studies and cognitive studies in an attempt to account for meaning-making activity and to predict the course of semiosis. In this context, I consider meaning-making activity as shaped by both "external" (to a semiotic system) as well as "internal" factors. I also show how both the "external" and "internal" sources of the dynamicity of meaning-making should be framed in terms of studies on cognition. I start with a non-standard, 4e approach to meaning-making. According to this framework, meaning-making processes are constituted by (and not just dependent on) environmental and bodily factors. The dynamicity of semiosis can be accounted for in terms of an experiencing, embodied subject (agent) enacting her/his/its own domain of meaningful phenomena. As I argue, this perspective on meaning-making is the cognitive foundation of the first two levels of the Semiotic Hierarchy. In the following sections I present the Peircean view on signs and semiosis, according to which semiosis is a result of the very nature of a sign and a sign system. In this view, the dynamicity of semiosis has primarily "internal" sources: it stems from the unavoidable fallibility of interpretation and synechism of signs. As I show, this aspect of semiosis can be addressed by means of standard (cognitivist) cognitive science and by means of cognitive modelling. Ultimately, I sketch a proposal of an attempt to develop a uniform cognitive framework allowing for integration of the above-mentioned aspects of semiosis-a framework based on Rowlands' idea of the Amalgamated Mind.

View PDFchevron_right
The Conscious Semiotic Mind
Piotr Konderak

Studia Semiotyczne, 2017

S U M M A RY : The paper discusses possible roles of consciousness in a semiotic (meaning-making) activity of a cognitive agent. The discussion, we claim, is based on two related approaches to consciousness: on Chalmers' theory of phenomenal and psychological consciousness and on Damasio's neural theory , which draws a distinction between core and extended consciousness. Two stages of cognitive-semiotic processing are discussed: the moment of perception of a sign as a meaningful entity and the metasemiotic processes understood as the human capacity to reflect on signs and their usage, analyse and control processes of recognition, interpretation of signs and to detect and correct errors in semiotic activity. In the case of the first stage, it is argued that signs as meaningful entities have a distincly experiential character. The feeling of meaningfulness is a result of phenomenal consciousness, in particular a result of the so-called valuation features of phenomenal experience. I claim that this aspect of cogni-tive-semiotic activity is possible owing to a special neural mechanism called a semiotic marker. It is argued that semiotic systems have to be able to use signs as signs, i.e. they should display some metacognitive capacities, in particular an ability to analyse semiosis at a metalevel. It is argued that such metasemiosis is dependent on psychological consciousness (in Chalmers' terms: awareness) and is realized at the neural level in the form of extended consciousness. The paper is based on a particular understanding of cognitive semiotics as a discipline involving analyses of cognitive processes as semiotic processes, i.e. processes requiring usage of signs.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Philosophy
  • Language Origins
  • Communication and media Studies
  • Language Communication
  • Semiotic Resources
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved