LEADER 04221nam  22006255  450 
001 9910298395503321
005 20231121115452.0
010   $a3-319-97903-5
024 7 $a10.1007/978-3-319-97903-8
035   $a(CKB)4100000007142699
035   $a(MiAaPQ)EBC5598931
035   $a(DE-He213)978-3-319-97903-8
035   $a(PPN)232471681
035   $a(EXLCZ)994100000007142699
100   $a20181114d2018      u|         0
101 0 $aeng
135   $aurcnu||||||||
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 12$aA Biosemiotic Ontology $eThe Philosophy of Giorgio Prodi /$fby Felice Cimatti
205   $a1st ed. 2018.
210  1$aCham :$cSpringer International Publishing :$cImprint: Springer,$d2018.
215   $a1 online resource (159 pages)
225 1 $aBiosemiotics,$x1875-466X ;$v18
311   $a3-319-97902-7 
327   $aChapter 1. Introduction -- Chapter 2. Life -- Chapter 3. Scientist because Philosopher, Philosopher because Scientist -- Chapter 4. The Line and the Circle -- Chapter 5. The Biological Model: for an anti-Cartesian semiotics -- Chapter 6. Of the Complementarity of the Sign -- Chapter 7. The Origin of Language -- Chapter 8. Attention and Consciousness -- Chapter 9. Breaking the Circle -- Chapter 10. Language and Ethics -- Chapter 11. The ?Darkness? Between Aesthetics and the Sacred -- Chapter 12. Conclusion: Prodi and Italian Thought.
330   $aGiorgio Prodi (1928-1987) was an important Italian scientist who developed an original philosophy based on two basic assumptions: 1. life is mainly a semiotic phenomenon; 2. matter is somewhat a semiotic phenomenon. Prodi applies Peirce's cenopythagorean categories to all phenomena of life and matter: Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness. They are interconnected meaning that the very ontology of the world, according to Prodi, is somewhat semiotic. In fact, when one describes matter as ?made of? Firstness and Secondness, this means that matter ?intrinsically? implies semiotics (with Thirdness also being present in the world). At the very heart of Prodi?s theory lies a metaphysical hypothesis which is an ambitious theoretical gesture that places Prodi in an awkward position with respect to the customary philosophical tradition. In fact, his own ontology is neither dualistic nor monistic. Such a conclusion is unusual and weird, but much less unusual in present time than it was when it was first introduced. The actual resurgence of various ?realisms? make Prodi?s semiotic realism much more interesting than when he first proposed his philosophical approach. What is uncommon, in Prodi perspective, is that he never separated semiotics from the materiality of the world. Prodi does not agree with the ?standard? structuralist view of semiosis as an artificial and unnatural activity. On the contrary, Prodi believed semiosis (that is, the interconnection between Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness) lies at the very bottom of life. On one hand, Prodi maintains a strong realist stance; on the other, a realism that includes semiosis as ?natural? phenomena. This last view is very unusual because all forms, more or less, of realism exclude semiosis from nature but they frequently ?reduce? semiosis to non-semiotic elements. According to Prodi, semiosis is a completely natural phenomenon.
410  0$aBiosemiotics,$x1875-466X ;$v18
606   $aSemiotics
606   $aOntology
606   $aPhilosophy of mind
606   $aLife sciences
606   $aLogic
606   $aSemiotics
606   $aOntology
606   $aPhilosophy of Mind
606   $aLife Sciences
606   $aLogic
615  0$aSemiotics.
615  0$aOntology.
615  0$aPhilosophy of mind.
615  0$aLife sciences.
615  0$aLogic.
615 14$aSemiotics.
615 24$aOntology.
615 24$aPhilosophy of Mind.
615 24$aLife Sciences.
615 24$aLogic.
676   $a570.14
700   $aCimatti$b Felice$4aut$4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut$0147228
906   $aBOOK
912   $a9910298395503321
996   $aA Biosemiotic Ontology$92496864
997   $aUNINA