Relations between Signs and Symbols In the Light of Peircian Philosophy Gennaro Auletta Pontificia Universitas Gregoriana

Peirce’s semiotic studies Peirce has given rise to this important field, which is very relevant for living beings (including humans). However, semiotics cannot be applied to the physical world. We need here the concept of information, which was formulated much later. For humans, on the contrary, signs are insufficient, and we also need the concept of symbols.

What is a Sign? A sign is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity [CP: and 1.540; 1868b: 223]. Signs have an iconic function and an indexical function. (1) The iconic function is the respect or capacity, whereas (2) the indexical function is the standing-for aspect [see CP: 2.304].

Cherry’s and Morris’ Triangle

Ethology Studies Showed 3 Forms Reference (Marler and Green’s indexical reference that is not an active production of a sign), Addressing (deictic semiosis in Marler and Green’s language that also covers other contextual forms of communication), which is basic to all form of communication, and Purposivity, which is the active transmission of a sign as sign of something to a partner who can understand it as a sign of this something.

First Semiotic Mode (Reference)

Second Semiotic Mode (Addressing)

Third Semiotic Mode ( Purposivity)

Information is codified A code is a set of physical objects or states that are functionally elementary and therefore play the role of codifying units, are alternative (each use of one of them implies a choice), and can be combined to form clusters so that the whole is functionally independent from the units.

Let us apply this to Information Source of variety. Mutual information. Selection.

General Scheme

Differences Between Information and Sign Information is codified, signs do not. A sign is referential and therefore stands for something else, whereas information stands for nothing else. A sign can be taken as a representation (an icon) of something else (given the standing-for relation), while information does not.

Symbols Symbols are codified, like information. Symbols do not have an iconic aspect, like information (they invite the partners to provide one). Symbols are referential, like signs.

Social Aspect A symbol must be shared in order to be understood, that is, it consists in an intentional process (a joint, non-physical, social action of at least two partners toward a third party), And, for this reason, symbols are conventional.

Double referential relation: Sender-Symbol-Referent and Receiver-Symbol-Icon

References (and therein) G. Auletta, “Is Representation Characterized by Intrinsicity and Causality?, Intellectica 35 (2002): G. Auletta, “Quantum Information as a General Paradigm”, Foundations of Physics 35 (2005): G. Auletta, “Logic, Semiotics,and Language”, Croatian Journal of Philosophy 5.13 (2005): G. Auletta "The Problem of Information", in G. Auletta (Ed.), Proceedings of the I Workshop on the Relationships Between Science and Philosophy, Vatican City, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2006: G. Auletta, "Information, Semiotics, and Symbolic Systems", Semiotica 166 (2007): G. Auletta, G. Ellis, L. Jaeger, “Top-Down Causation by Information Control: From a Philosophical Problem to a Scientific Research Program”, Journal of the Royal Society: Interface (2008)