Is The Cell A Semiotic System?
Semiotics is the study of signs and initially it was thought to be concerned only with the products of culture. Mental phenomena, however, exist also in animals, and cultural semiotics came to be regarded as a special case of biological semiotics, or biosemiotics, a science that started by studying semiotic phenomena in animals and then it was gradually extended to other living creatures. Eventually, the discovery of the genetic code suggested that the cell itself has a semiotic structure and the goal of biosemiotics became the idea that all living creatures are semiotic systems. This conclusion, however, is valid only if we accept that the genetic code is a real code, but an influential school of thought, known as physicalism, has apparently convinced many people that it is only a metaphor, a mere linguistic expression that we use in order to avoid long periphrases. The argument is that the genetic code would be real only if it was associated with the production of meaning, but modern science does not deal with meaning and is bound therefore to relegate the genetic code among the metaphorical entities.
In this paper it is shown that there is no need to avoid the issue of meaning and to deny the reality of the genetic code. On the contrary, it is shown that organic meaning can be defined with operative procedures and belongs to a new class of fundamental natural entities that are as objective and reproducible as the physical quantities. It is also shown that the presence of molecular adaptors gives us an objective criterion for recognizing the existence of organic codes in Nature, and that criterion proves that the genetic code has all the qualifying features of a real code. It also proves that the genetic code is not alone in the cellular world, and that many other organic codes appeared in the history of life, especially in eukaryotic cells.
The conclusion that the cell is a semiotic system, in short, is based on the experimental evidence provided by the adaptors, but also requires a new theoretical framework where concepts like sign, meaning and code are not put aside as metaphorical entities but are defined by operative procedures and are recognized as fundamental components of the living world
KeywordsSemiotics biosemiotics information meaning organic codes ribotype physicalism
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Alberts, B., Bray, D., Lewis, J., Raff, M., Roberts, K., & Watson, J.D. (1994). Molecular Biology of the Cell.3rd edition. Garland, New York.Google Scholar
- Barbieri M. (1985). The Semantic Theory of Evolution. Harwood Academic Publishers, London and New York.Google Scholar
- Barbieri M. (1998). The Organic Codes. The basic mechanism of macroevolution. Rivista di Biologia- Biology Forum, 91, 481–514.Google Scholar
- Barbieri M. (2003). The Organic Codes. An Introduction to Semantic Biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Barbieri M. (2004). The Definitions of Information and Meaning. Two possible boundaries between physics and biology. Rivista di Biologia-Biology Forum, 97, 91–110.Google Scholar
- Chargaff, E. (1963). Essays on Nucleic Acids. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
- Florkin, Marcel (1974). Concepts of molecular biosemiotics and molecular evolution. In Comprehensive Biochemistry, vol.29 part A (Comparative Biochemistry, Molecular Evolution), Marcel Florkin and Elmer H. Stotz (eds.), Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1–124.Google Scholar
- Johannsen, W. (1909). Elemente der exacten Erblichkeitslehre. Gustav Fisher, Jena.Google Scholar
- Mahner, M. and Bunge, M. (1997). Foundations of Biophilosophy. Springer Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
- Markoš, A. (2002). Readers of the Book of Life: Conceptualizing Developmental Evolutionary Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
- Maynard Smith, J. & Szathmáry E. 1995. The Major Transitions in Evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
- Pattee, H. H. (1969). The physical basis of coding and reliability in biological evolution. In C. H. Waddington (ed.) Toward a Theoretical Biology Vol. 1, Edinburgh Univ. Press, 1969, pp. 67–93.Google Scholar
- Pattee, H. H. (1972). Laws and constraints, symbols and languages. In C. H. Waddington (ed.) Towards a Theoretical Biology Vol. 4,, Edinburgh Univ. Press, 1972, pp. 248–258.Google Scholar
- Peirce, Charles S. (1931–1958) Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Harvard University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.Google Scholar
- Sarkar, S. (1996). Biological Information. A Skeptical Look at some Central Dogmas of Molecular Biology. In S. Sarkar (ed.) The Philosophy and History of Biology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 187–231.Google Scholar
- Saussure, Ferdinand de (1916). Cours de linguistique générale. Payot, Paris.Google Scholar
- Sebeok, T. A. (1972). Perspectives in Zoosemiotics. Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
- Sebeok, T. A. (2001). Biosemiotics: Its roots, proliferation, and prospects. Semiotica, 134, 68.Google Scholar
- Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Systems Technical Journal, 27, 379–424, 623–656.Google Scholar
- Woese, C.R. (2000). Interpreting the universal phylogenetic tree. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 97, 8392–8396.Google Scholar