Icon and Abduction: Situatedness in Peircean Cognitive Semiotics

  • Pedro Atã
  • João Queiroz
Conference paper
Part of the Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics book series (SAPERE, volume 8)


Differently from the anti-cartesianism defended by some embodied-situated cognitive scientists, which is predominantly anti-representationalist, for C. S. Peirce, mind is semiosis (sign-action) in a dialogical form, and cognition is the development of available semiotic material artifacts in which it is embodied as a power to produce interpretants (sign-effects). It takes the form of development of semiotic artifacts, such as writing tools, instruments of observation, notational systems, languages, and so forth. Our objective in this paper is to explore the connection between a semiotic theory of mind and the conception of situatedness and extended mind through the notions of iconicity and abductive inference, taking advantage of an empirical example of investigation in distributed problem solving (Tower of Hanoi).


Icon Abduction Situatedness Problem solving Peirce Cognitive semiotics 


  1. 1.
    Dreyfus, H.L.: Intelligence without representation: Merleau-Ponty’s critique of mental representation. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. 1, 367–383 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wheeler, M.: Reconstructing the Cognitive World—The Next Step. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chemero, A.: Radical Embodied Cognitive Science. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Skagestad, P.: Peirce’s semeiotic model of the mind. In: Misak, C. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Peirce, pp. 241–256. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gallagher, S.: Philosophical antecedents of situated cognition. In: Robins, P., Aydele, M. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition, pp. 35–54. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang, J., Norman, D.A.: Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cogn. Sci. 18, 1–34 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ransdell, J.: Some leading ideas of Peirce’s semiotic. Semiotica 19, 157–178 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hausman, C.R., Charles, S.: Peirce’s Evolutionary Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Tienne, A.: Learning qua semiosis. Semiot. Evol. Energ. Dev. 3, 37–53 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bergman, M.: Reflections on the role of the communicative sign in semeiotic. Trans. Charles S. Peirce Soc. 36, 225–254 (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Queiroz, J., El-Hani, C.: Semiosis as an emergent process. Trans. C.S. Peirce Soc. 42(1), 78–116 (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Savan, D.: An Introduction to C. S. Peirce’s Full System of Semiotic. Monograph Series of the Toronto Semiotic Circle, vol. 1, Victoria College, Toronto (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Queiroz, J.: Complexification. In: Favareau, D., Cobley, P., Kull, K. (orgs.) A More Developed Sign—Interpreting the Work of Jesper Hoffmeyer, pp. 67–70. Tartu University Press, Tartu (2012a)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Queiroz, J.: Dicent symbols in non-human semiotic processes. Biosemiotics 5, 1–11 (2012b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stjernfelt, F.: Diagrammatology—An Investigation on the Borderlines of Phenomenology, Ontology, and Semiotics. Springer, Dordrecht (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hookway, C.: Truth, Rationality, and Pragmatism: Themes from Peirce. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hoffmann, M.: Problems with Peirce’s concept of abduction. Found. Sci. 4, 271–305 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paavola, S.: Peircean abduction: instinct or inference? Semiotica 153(1/4), 131–154 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Magnani, L.: An abductive theory of scientific reasoning. Semiotica 153(1/4), 261–286 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paavola, S.: Diagrams, iconicity, and abductive discovery. Semiotica 186(1/4), 297–314 (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhang, J.: The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cogn. Sci. 21, 179–217 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chuah, J., Zhang, J., Johnson, T.: The representational effect in complex systems: a distributed cognition approach. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Erlbaum, pp. 633–638 (2000)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Paavola, S.: Abduction through grammar, critic, and methodeutic. Trans. Charles S. Peirce Soc. 40, 245–270 (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clark, A., Chalmers, D.: The extended mind. Analysis 58, 7–19 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Clark, A.: Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. A Bradford Book, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Clark, A.: Memento’s revenge: the extended mind, extended. In: Menary, R. (ed.) Objections and Replies to the Extended Mind, pp. 1–43. Ashgate, Oxford (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Arts and DesignFederal University of Juiz de ForaJuiz de ForaBrazil

Personalised recommendations