Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Visual Semiotics, Abduction, and the Learning Paradox: The Role of Graphic Signs

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Abductive Cognition

  • 36 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines the semiotics of abductive inference as based in archetypal images and unconscious processes. The apparent paradox of learning by way of creative thought is unfolded and partially resolved by demonstrating the essentially experimental nature of all knowledge acquisition. Emphasizing the triadic character of Peirce’s conception of the sign and the relevance of Polanyi’s concept of tacit knowledge for theorizing abductive processes of reasoning, the specific role of the imagination in abduction as characterized by a logic of the “included third” rather than that of the excluded middle is analyzed in terms of the figure of the Fool, the zero arcanum, from among the traditional iconography of the Tarot. Formal aspects of abductive reasoning are then considered from the standpoint of the semiotics of visual images and models, in particular their iconic and indexical dimensions and their liminal character as standing between the purely imaginary on the one hand and the rationally cognitive on the other hand.

Inna Semetsky: deceased.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aphek, E., & Tobin, Y. (1989). The semiotics of fortune-telling (Vol. 22, foundations of semiotics). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrow, J. D. (2000). The book of nothing. Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G., & Bateson, M.C. (1987). Steps to an ecology of mind. Chandler Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berne, E. (1977). Intuition and ego states: The origins of transactional analysis. Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1979). On knowing: Essays for the left hand. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colapietro, V. M. (2000). Further consequences of a singular capacity. In J. Muller & J. Brent (Eds.), Peirce, semiotics, and psychoanalysis (pp. 136–158). Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, H. (1972). Mundus imaginalis, or the imaginary and the imaginal (R. Horine, Trans.). Analytical Psychology Club of New York, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deely, J. (1990). Basics of semiotics. Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deely, J. (2001). Four ages of understanding: The first postmodern survey of philosophy from ancient times to the turn of the twenty-first century. University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1991). How we think. Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dummett, M. (1980). The game of tarot: From Ferrara to Salt Lake City. Gerald Duckworth & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dummett, M., & Decker, R. (2002). A history of the occult tarot, 1870–1970. Gerald Duckworth & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egorov, B. F. (1977). The simplest semiotic system and the typology of plots. In D. P. Lucid (Ed.), Soviet semiotics: An anthology (pp. 77–86). Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetzer, J. H. (1991). Philosophy and cognitive science. Paragon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, J. H. (2000). The tacit mode: Michael Polanyi's postmodern philosophy. SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grush, R., & Churchland, P. S. (1995). Gaps in Penrose's toiling. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(1), 10–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guiraud, P. (1975). Semiology (G. Gross, Trans.). Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, I. (1990). The taming of chance. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heeren, J. W., & Mason, M. (1984). Seeing and believing: A study of contemporary spiritual readers. Semiotica, 50(3/4), 191–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J. (1998). What is abduction? The fundamental problem of contemporary epistemology. Transactions of Charles S. Peirce Society, 34, 503–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmeyer, J., & Emmeche, C. (1991). Code-duality and the semiotics of nature. In M. Anderson & F. Merrell (Eds.), On semiotic modeling (pp. 117–166). Mouton De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jantsch, E. (1975). Design for evolution: Self-organization and planning in the life of human systems. George Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jantsch, E. (1980). The self-organizing universe: Scientific and human implications of the emerging paradigm of evolution. Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jha, S. R. (2002). Reconsidering Michael Polanyi’s philosophy. University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, L. H. (1996). Virtual logic. Systems Research, 13(3), 293–310.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, L. H. (2001). The mathematics of Charles Sanders Peirce. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 8(1–2), 79–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelso, J. A. S. (1995). Dynamic patterns: The self-organization of brain and behavior. The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelso, J. A. S., & Engstrøm, D. A. (2006). The complementary nature. The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, J. B. (2003). Space, time and Einstein: An introduction. Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kevelson, R. (1999). Peirce and the mark of the gryphon. St. Martin's Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kihlstrom, J. F. (1993). The rediscovery of the unconscious. In H. J. Morowitz & J. L. Singer (Eds.), The mind, the brain, and complex adaptive systems (Vol. 22, pp. 123–143). Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lekomceva, M. I., & Uspensky, B. A. (1977). Describing a semiotic system with a simple syntax. In D. P. Lucid (Ed.), Soviet semiotics: An anthology (pp. 65–76). Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd, S. (2006). Programming the universe: A quantum computer scientist takes on the cosmos. Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magnani, L. (2001). Abduction, reason, and science: Processes of discovery and explanation. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrell, F. (1992). Sign, textuality, world. Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrell, F. (1995). Peirce’s semiotics now: A primer. Canadian Scholars' Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrell, F. (1996). Signs grow: Semiosis and life processes. University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrell, F. (1997). Peirce, signs, and meaning. University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrell, F. (2002). Learning living, living learning: Signs, between east and west. Legas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (1995). Handbook of semiotics. Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W. (2012). Translation and semiotic mediation. Sign Systems Studies, 40(3–4), 279–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nöth, W., & Jungk, I. (2015). Peircean visual semiotics: Potentials to be explored. Semiotica, 2015(207), 657–673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otte, M. F. (2011). Evolution, learning, and semiotics from a Peircean point of view. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 77(2–3), 313–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C. S. (1931–1935; 1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 1–6, Ed. C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss; Vol. 7 and 8, Ed. A. Burks). Harvard University Press. [cited as CP].

    Google Scholar 

  • Peirce, C.S., & Jastrow, J. (1884). On small differences of sensation. Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences, 3, 75–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, R. (1994). Shadows of the mind: A search for the missing science of consciousness. Oxford University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, R. (1997). The large, the small, and the human mind. Cambridge University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, R. (2004). The road to reality: A complete guide to the laws of the universe. Jonathan Cape.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. (1964). Science, faith, and society. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, R. (2004). Basic tasks of cultural semiotics. In G. Withalm & J. Wallmannsberger (Eds.), Signs of power – Power of signs. Essays in honor of Jeff Bernard (pp. 56–89). INST.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos. Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockwell, W. T. (2007). Neither brain nor ghost: A nondualist alternative to the mind-brain identity theory. The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotman, B. (1987). Signifying nothing: The semiotics of zero. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotman, B. (1993). Ad infinitum – The ghost in turing's machine. Stanford University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Rucker, R. (1982). Infinity and the mind: The science and philosophy of the infinite. Birkhauser.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, D. (2010). The mathematical side of M.C. Escher. Notices of the AMS, 57(6), 706–718.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sebeok, T. A. (Ed.). (1994). Encyclopedic dictionary of semiotics (Approaches to semiotics; 73) (Vol. 1). Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semetsky, I. (2004). The role of intuition in thinking and learning: Deleuze and the pragmatic legacy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 36(4), 433–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semetsky, I. (2011). Re-symbolization of the self: Human development and tarot hermeneutic. Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semetsky, I. (2013). The edusemiotics of images: Essays on the art∼science of tarot. Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semetsky, I. (2014). Taking the edusemiotic turn: A body∼mind approach to education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 48(3), 490–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semetsky, I. (2015). Interpreting Peirce’s abduction through the lens of mathematics. In M. Bockarova, M. Danesi, D. Martinovic, & R. Núñez (Eds.), Mind in mathematics: Essays on mathematical cognition and mathematical method (pp. 154–166). Lincom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semetsky, I. (2020). Semiotic subjectivity in education and counseling: Learning with the unconscious. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semetsky, I., & Stables, A. (Eds.). (2014). Pedagogy and edusemiotics: Theoretical challenges/practical opportunities. Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimony, A. (1989). Search for a worldview which can accommodate our knowledge of microphysics. In J. T. Cushing & E. McMullin (Eds.), Philosophical consequences of quantum theory: Reflections on Bell’s theorem. University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimony, A. (1993). Search for a naturalistic world view: Scientific method and epistemology (Vol. I-II). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shlain, L. (1998). The alphabet versus the goddess: The conflict between word and image. Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1995). Near decomposability and complexity: How a mind resides in a brain. In H. J. Morovitz & J. L. Singer (Eds.), The mind, the brain, and complex adaptive systems. Proceedings vol. XXII. Santa Fe institute in the sciences of complexity (pp. 25–43). Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, I. (Ed.). (1997). Page to screen: Taking literacy into the electronic era. Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer-Brown, G. (1979). Laws of form. E. P. Dutton.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Stapp, H. P. (2007). Mindful universe: Quantum mechanics and the participating observer. Springer-Verlag.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Stjernfelt, F. (2007). Diagrammatology: An investigation on the borderlines of phenomenology, ontology, and semiotics. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thom, R. (1985). From the icon to the symbol. In R. E. Innis (Ed.), Semiotics: An introductory anthology (pp. 275–291). Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, B. (2019). Mind in motion: How action shapes thought. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varela, F. J. (1979). Principles of biological autonomy. North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varela, F. J. (1999). Ethical know-how: Action, wisdom and cognition. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Eckardt, B. (1996). What is cognitive science? The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Edusemiotics Studies, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Inna Semetsky

Authors
  1. Inna Semetsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Humanities, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy

    Lorenzo Magnani

Section Editor information

  1. Endicott College, Beverly, MA, USA

    Gianluca Caterina

  2. Endicott College, Beverly, MA, USA

    Rocco Gangle

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Semetsky, I. (2022). Visual Semiotics, Abduction, and the Learning Paradox: The Role of Graphic Signs. In: Magnani, L. (eds) Handbook of Abductive Cognition. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68436-5_40-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68436-5_40-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-68436-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-68436-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsReference Module Computer Science and Engineering

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation