GENERAL GNOSEOLOGY:
a Peircian Triad
Contributed by AULM sa (Geneva)
Dr. Paul GEROME
113322.1543@CompuServe.com
For the Workshop on
Philosophy of Formal Languages
ITU-T- Study Group 10
Geneva - 15 September 2001
Tactim:
GENERAL GNOSEOLOGY is to GNOSEOLOGIES
what GENERAL LINGUISTICS is to
LANGUAGE LINGUISTICS
A world anthropological survey discloses a variety
of representations of knowledge (ancient Greek:
gnosis). Each system of classification of socially
shareable Indigenous Knowledge Elements (IKEs)
is to be accessed by Global Meaningful Information
Managers and made comprehensible for users
self-referring to a very distinct system of classes.
Inter-operability is rooted in FORMAL LANGUAGES.
IKEs have to be translated to be truly shared
across culture/nature gnoseological models.
Transduced Data are to be presented within
users KNOWN CODES.
GENERAL GNOSEOLOGY is the required Tool-Box to
help in processing MEANINGFUL IKEs along Open
Networks to MultiModal Terminals and differently
literate MultiCultural Users
Perception, Cognition and Behaviour modes form a
classic triad, but the Basic Triad of the American
Philosopher Charles Sanders PEIRCE (1839-1914)
is offering optimal focus precision.
THE BASIC TRIADIC SYSTEM
« In the face of a potentially overwhelming complexity of transactions
between entities at different levels we must seek to discover what
might be the basic minimal set of relationships that would
satisfactorily frame most (or the most important) relationships.
A reading of some of the literature on systems reveals for us what that
structure is. The smallest cluster of levels required to represent
fundamental interactive relationships is A TRIAD OF CONTIGUOUS LEVELS,
so that we can simultaneously examine some process (or the events it
produces), the context of these events, and their causes. Quoting
Bateson (1979), we would look for the ’' relations between two levels of
structure mediated by an intervening description of process "».
Pr. Stanley N. SALTHE, Evolving Hierarchical Systems, Columbia University Press, N.Y.,1985
The Focal Level is produced by interaction
of its two framing levels.
The level of interest (the system),
the level without (the environment),
the level within (the components).
Patten(1975)
« THREE ADJACENT LEVELS SHOULD
PROVIDE FOR A MINIMAL
DESCRIPTION OF ANY COMPLEX
DIACHRONIC SYSTEM.
Any formulation short of this will be
inadequate to those pursuing complex
phenomena. »
S.N. Salthe (1985)
ISO31 & ISO1000 give norm value
to orders of magnitude:
PREFIXES are what they mean.
Systems of interpretants# would be systems of
downstream consequences of semiosis*, with one
interpretant following another, perhaps branching
as well. Semiosis itself could be viewed as a
system of interpretants. Systems of interpretance
(SI) would be systems of semiosic systems.
*Semiosis: sign process.
# Interpretant: meaning or sense.
SYSTEMS Of INTERPRETANCE Hsi
SCALAR SYSTEMS Hsc &
SPECIFICATION Hsp Hierarchies
Building consensus on ISO31 & ISO1000 as
baseline documents for coherence in current
standardisation processes and procedures
is the subtext of this presentation.
System Science, Semiotic Studies and Rhetorics
as well as World Economic Anthropology are the
philosophical roots of AULM ’s contribution.
THANKS TO ALL !
A semiosis Z is a process involving a channel Ch with an interpretandum S,
which is related to an interpretatum G by being perceived and represented as
a signifier (Rs) in the organism (O) of its interpreter ; the signifier (Rs) then being
mediated by an interpretant (I) to connect with the signified (Rg),
which represents the interpretatum G within the organism (O).
Via the interpretant (I), this process of symbolising and referring triggers
dispositions for instrumental behaviour (Rbg) and/or signaling behaviour (Rsg);
these are both related to the interpretatum G and terminate, via appropriate
effectors, in overt instrumental behaviour BG or signaling behaviour SG, the latter
supplying interpretanda for a further process of interpretation. Each semiosis Z
is surrounded by other semioses and takes place in a context C external to (O) as
well as a context (c)internal to (O).
This complex definition may be illustrated graphically by
a semiotic matrix which displays the various partial processes.
MARTIN KRAMPEN, SEMIOTICS, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin,1997.
Z
semiosis
C
C
External context
(c)
Internal
context
sign
Ch
Channel
Ch
(Rs)
signifier
S
interpretandum =
signal standing for G
(imputed relation)
Obj G
interpretatum
(object)
means G
symbolizes G
(I)
(Rsg)
signaling
disposition
Sobj G
signaling
behaviour
Interpretant
(Rg)
signified
object,
referent
designatum
denotatum
significatum
perception
(Rbg)
behaviour
disposition
Bobj G
instrumental
behaviour
refers
to G
(O)
organism of the interpreter
cognition
behaviour
Martin
Krampen,
1997