Abstract
Meaning is a central concept of (bio)semiotics. At the same time, it is also a word of everyday language. Here, on the example of the world information, we discuss the “reduction-inflation model” of evolution of a common word into a scientific concept, to return subsequently into everyday circulation with new connotations. Such may be, in the near future, also the fate of the word meaning if, flexed through objectified semantics, will become considered an objective concept usable in semiotics. We argue that reducing meaning to a technical term essentially synonymous to code and stripped of most of the original semantic field is not a necessary prerequisite for a meaningful application of the concept in semiotics and in biology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
But grammar may sometimes help with such a spelling: not all sequences will give sense.
Surprisingly, not only biological sciences succumbed to the reduced version of information: the same process took place in linguistics, too. By language metaphor, then, we do not mean making analogies with formal languages that are subject to scientific study (Markoš and Faltýnek 2011).
You will also be accused of laziness, because instead of hard work in the lab you kill your time by “philosophizing”. But this is not the point we want to touch.
References
Barbieri, M. (2003). The organic codes. An introduction semantic biology. Cambridge University Press.
Barbieri, M. (2008a). Biosemiotics: a new understanding of life. Naturwissenschaften, 95, 577–599.
Barbieri, M. (2008b). The code model of semiosis: the first steps toward a scientific biosemiotics. American Journal of Semiotics, 24, 23–37.
Barbieri, M. (2011a). A mechanistic model of meaning. Biosemiotics, 4(1), 1–4.
Barbieri, M. (2011b). Origin and evolution of the brain. Biosemiotics, 4(3), 369–399.
Bateson, G. (1972 [1969]). Double bind. In Steps to an ecology of mind (pp. 271–278). New York: Ballantine Books.
Bergman, A., & Siegal, M. L. (2003). Evolutionary capacitance as a general feature of complex gene networks. Nature, 424, 549–552.
Brier, S. (2003). The cybersemiotic model of communication: an evolutionary view on the threshold between semiosis and informational exchange. TripleC, 1, 71–94.
Christley, S. Y., Lu, C., Li, C., & Xie, X. (2008). Human genomes as email attachments. Bioinformatics, 25, 274–275.
Crick, F. H. C. (1958). On protein synthesis. Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology, XII, 139–163.
Csete, M. E., & Doyle, J. C. (2002). Reverse engineering of biological complexity. Science, 295, 1664–1669.
Cvrčková, F., Lipavská, H., & Žárský, V. (2009). Plant intelligence: why, why not, or where? Plant Signalling and Behavior, 4, 394–399.
Deely, J. (2008). Descartes & Poinsot. The crossroads of signs and ideas. Scranton: University of Scranton Press.
Deely, J. (2009a). Augustine & Poinsot. The protosemiotic development. Scranton: University of Scranton Press.
Deely, J. (2009b). Pars pro toto from culture to nature: an overview of semiotics as a postmodern development, with an anticipation of development to come. American Journal of Biochemistry, 25, 167–192.
Deely, J. (2010). Purely objective reality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Driesch, H. (1905). Vitalismus als Geschichte und Lehre. Leipzig: Barth.
Heelan, P. A. (1998). The scope of hermeneutics in natural science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 29, 273–278.
Heidegger, M. (1971 [1950]). The thing. In Poetry, language, thought (pp. 161–184). S. Francisco: Harper.
Jantsch, E. (1979). The self-organizing universe. Pergamon.
Kauffman, S. A. (2000). Investigations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kimchi-Sarfaty, C., Oh, J. M., Kim, I.-W., Sauna, Z. E., Calcagno, A. M., Ambudkar, S. V., & Gottesman, M. M. (2007). A “silent” polymorphism in the MDR1gene changes substrate specificity. Science, 315, 525–528.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago University Press.
Mackay, A. L. (2001). Character-building. Nature, 410, 19. Macroevolution. Springer, 3–14.
Markoš, A., (2002). Readers of the book of life. Conceptualizing evolutionary developmental biology. Oxford University Press.
Markoš, A. (2010). Biosemiotics and the collision of modernism with the postmodernity. Cognitio (Sao Paulo), 11, 69–78.
Markoš, A., & Cvrčková, F. (2002). Back to the science of life. Sign System Studies, 30, 129–147.
Markoš, A., & Faltýnek, D. (2011). Language metaphors of life. Biosemiotics, 4, 171–200.
Markoš, A., Grygar, F., Hajnal, L., Kleisner, K., Kratochvíl, Z., & Neubauer, Z. (2009). Life as its own designer: Darwin’s origin and western thought. Springer.
Markoš, A., & Švorcová, J. (2009). Recorded versus organic memory. Biosemiotics, 2, 131–149.
Reber, P. (2010). What is the memory capacity of the human brain? Scientific American Mind, May 2010.
Rutherford, S. L., & Lindquist, S. (1998). Hsp90 as a capacitor for morphological evolution. Nature, 396, 336–342.
Ruyer, R. (1974). La gnose de Princeton. [The Princeton gnosis]. Paris: Fayard.
Sangster, T. A., Lindquist, S., & Queitsch, C. (2004). Under cover: causes, effects and implications of Hsp90-mediated genetic capacitance. Bioessays, 26, 348–62.
Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27(379–423), 623–656.
Shannon, C. E., Weaver, W. (1949). Mathematical theory of communication. Univ. Illinois Press.
Snow, C. P. (2003 [1957]). The two cultures. Cambridge University Press.
Taipale, M., Jarosz, D. F., & Lindquist, S. (2010). HSP90 at the hub of protein homeostasis: emerging mechanistic insights. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 11, 515–28.
Trewavas, A. (2003). Aspects of plant intelligence. Annals of Botany, 92, 1–20.
Trifonov, E. N. (2008). Codes of biosequences. In M. Barbieri (Ed.), The codes of life. The rules of macroevolution (pp. 3–14). Springer.
Wang, Y., Liu, D., & Wang, Y. (2003). Discovering the capacity of human memory. Brain and Mind, 4, 189–198.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by grants from the Czech Ministry of education (MSM0021620845 to AM and MSM0021620858 to FC).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Markoš, A., Cvrčková, F. The Meaning(s) of Information, Code … and Meaning . Biosemiotics 6, 61–75 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-012-9155-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-012-9155-3