Abstract
In his well-known essay, ‘What Is a Sign?’(CP 2.281, 285) Peirce uses ‘likeness’ and ‘resemblance’ interchangeably in his definition of icon. The synonymity of the two words has rarely, if ever, been questioned. Curiously, a locus classicus of the pair, at least in F. M. Cornford’s English translation, can be found in a late dialogue of Plato, namely, the Sophist. In this dialogue on the myth and truth of the sophists’ profession, the mysterious ‘stranger’, who is most likely Socrates’ persona, makes the famous distinction between eikon (likeness) and phantasma (semblance) (236a,b). For all his broad knowledge in ancient philosophy, Peirce never mentioned this parallel; nor has any Peircean scholar identified it. There seems to be little problem with eikon as likeness, but phantasma may give rise to a puzzle which this paper will attempt to solve. Plato uses two pairs of words: what eikon is to phantasma is eikastikén (the making of likeness [235d]) to phantastikén (semblance making [236c]). In other words, icons come into being because of the act of icon-making, which is none other than indexicality. Witness what Peirce says about the relationship between photographs and the objects they represent: “But this resemblance is due to the photographs having been produced under such circumstances that they were physically forced to correspond point by point to nature.” (Ibid.) Thus the iconicity which links the representamen (sign) and its object is made possible not only by an interpretant, but also by idexisation. Their possible etymological and epistemological links aside, the Peircean example of photographing and the Platonic discussion of painting and sculpturing in the Sophist, clearly show the physio-pragmatic aspect of iconicity. The paper will therefore reread the Peircean iconicity by closely analysing this relatively obscure Platonic text, and by so doing restore to the text its hidden semiotic dimension.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexandrov, V. E. (2007). Literature, literariness, and the brain. Comparative Literature, 59(2), 97–118.
Allen, M. J. B. (1989). Icastes: Marsilio Ficino's Interpretation of Plato’s. Sophist (Five Studies and a Critical Edition with Translation). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Benveniste, E. (1971 [1966]). Problems in General Linguistics. (trans.) M. E. Meek. Coral Gables: University of Miami Press.
Chang, H.-L. (2004). Semiotician or hermeneutician? Jakob von Uexküll revisited. Sign Systems Studies
de Saussure, F. (1959 [1916]). Course in general linguistics. (trans.) Wade Baskin. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fillmore, C. J. (1997). Lectures on deixis. Stanford: CSLI.
Jakobson, R. (1987). Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. In K. Pomorska & S. Rudy (Eds.), Language in literature (pp. 95–114). Cambridge: Belknap.
Jakobson, R. (1990). In L. R. Waugh & M. Monville-Burston (Eds.), On language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Martinet, A. (1964). Elements of general linguistics. (trans.) Elisabeth Palmer. New York: Faber & Faber.
Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological knowledge: diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Notomi, N. (1999). The unity of Plato’s sophist: between the sophist and the philosopher. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Panofsky, E. (1968). Idea: a concept in art theory. (trans.) J. J. S. Peake. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1984). In C. Moore et al. (Eds.), Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A chronological Edition. Vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1998 [1931–58]). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. 8 vols. (eds.) 1–6, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss, 7 & 8, Arthur W. Burks. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Reprint. Bristol: Thoemmes Press.
Peirce, C. S. (2000). In N. Houser et al. (Eds.), Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A chronological edition. Vol. 6. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Plato. (1921). Theaetetus. Sophist. (trans.) Harold North Fowler. Loeb Classical Library 123, Plato 7. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Plato (1989). Sophist. (trans.) F. M. Cornford. In (eds.), Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns. Plato: The Collected Dialogues. Bollingen Series 71. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Plato (1990). Plato’s Sophist. (trans.) William S. Cobb. Savage, M.D.: Rowman & Littlefield.
Plato (1995). ΣΟΦΙΣΤΗΣ. In: (eds.) E. A. Duke, W. F. Hicken, W. S. M. Nicoll, D. B. Robinson, and J. C. G. Strachan. Platonis Opera. Scriptorum Classicorum Bibliotheca Oxoniensis. Tomus I. Oxford: Clarendon.
Platon [Plato] (1925). Le Sophiste. Oeuvres Complètes. Tome 8, 3e partie. Texte établi par Auguste Diès: Paris: Les Belles Lettres
Rosen, S. (1983). Plato’s Sophist: The drama of original and image. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Seligman, P. (1974). Being and not-being: An introduction to Plato’s Sophist. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Silverman, A. (1991). Plato on Phantasia. Classical Antiquity, 10(1), 123–47.
Vernant, J.-P. (1991). The Birth of Images. (trans.). In F. I. Zeitlin (Ed.), His: Mortals and immortals: Collected essays (pp. 164–85). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
von Uexküll, J., & von Uexküll, T. (1943). Die Ewige frage: Biologische Variationen über einen platonischen Dialog. Europaische Revue, 19(3), 126–147. English translation as “The eternal question: Biological variations on a Platonic dialogue”, by Edgar Vögel. Sign Systems Studies 32.1 (2004).
Watson, G. (1998). Phantasia in classical thought. Galway: Galway University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chang, Hl. Plato and Peirce on Likeness and Semblance. Biosemiotics 5, 301–312 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-011-9134-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-011-9134-0