I. Peirce’s process philosophy and pragmatism
I.1. C.S.Peirce — A very short bio sketch
I.2. Pragmatism, and pragmaticism
I.3. Process philosophy (process versus substance)
I.4. Theory of categories — phaneroscopy, logic (and semeiotic), and metaphysics
I.5. The irreducibility of thirdness: a diagrammatic protocol
The pragmatist C.S.Peirce was a radical process thinker. His logical phenomenological categories are the foundation of his philosophical system. Thirdness is an irreducible triadic relation.
II. What is semiosis?
II.1. “Sign physiology of all kinds” — an introduction to Speculative Grammar
II.2. Morphological patterns of semiosis — classification of signs (cognitive and biosemiotics examples)
II.3. Hypoicons and the extended typologies of signs — image, diagram, metaphor
II.4. The extended theory of signs — introduction to 10, 28 and 66 classes of signs (application in cognitive science, visual arts and literature)
II.5. Semiosis as an emergent process — a multi-level system approach
Sign-mediated processes show a notable variety of morphological patterns. In an attempt to advance in the understanding of this variety, Peirce proposed several typologies, with different degrees of refinement. After 1903, he made a distinction between icons and iconic signs, or hypoicons, and introduces a division of 10, 28 and 66 classes of signs. Semiosis can be described as an emergent process of multi-level systems dynamics.
III. Peirce: “Every thought is an external sign”
III.1. Cognition as computation (GOFAI, symbolic paradigm)
III.2. Situated, embedded and embodied cognition
III.4. Peirce’s semiotic theory of mind as a precursor of distributed reasoning: “Mind is semiosis”
III.5. Implications to Philosophy of Cognitive Science and Cognitive Aesthetics
According to situated cognitive approach, mind is artifactualy distributed in time and space (physical and cultural). Peirce’s semiotic theory of mind is a precursor of distributed reasoning paradigm.
IV. Creativity, artistic creativity: internalism versus externalism
IV.1. Creativity research — a scientific program in Cognitive Science
IV.2. M. Boden: combinatorial, exploratory, and transformational creativity
IV.3. Artistic creativity — internalism versus externalism
IV.4. Conceptual space is a habit (sensu Peirce)
IV.5. Art is an ongoing self-corrective process rooted in an open self-corrective semeiotic process
Creativity research problems have been framed in an “internalist framework”, according to which the role of situation and external tools is secondary. Transformational creativity is related to the transformation of habits and conceptual spaces.
V. Thinking-tools, cognitive and semiotic artifacts
V.1. Cognitive cyborgs, thinking-tools and artifacts
V.2. Cognitive niche builders — “mind is just less and less in the head!”
V.3. Case studies in psychology, anthropology, and experimental semiotics
Sapiens-sapiens are natural-born cyborgs in the sense that they are coupled to external non-biological tools to supersize innate cognitive abilities.
VI. Intersemiotic translation as a cognitive artifact
VI.1. Intersemiotic translation (Transmediation, Intersemiotic transposition or Adaptation)
VI.2. Intersemiotic translation everywhere!
VI.3. Intersemiotic translation is a cognitive artifact — externalizing creativity
VI.4. Intersemiotic translation is an abductive tool
VI.5. Intersemiotic translation is a projective augmented intelligence technique, a generative model and a problem-solving task
Creative artists are cognitive cyborgs, and one of their most decisive implants is intersemiotic translation. Intersemiotic translation is default in creative art history. It is used as a thinking tool to predict new patterns of semiotic behavior and to generate competing ideas. Additionally, it works as a strategy to frame new problems in target systems.
VIII. Conceptual space transformation in arts through intersemiotic translation
VIII.1. Intersemiotic translation as transformational creative artifact
VIII.2. Some examples
VIII.2.1. One-point visual perspective > classical ballet
VIII.2.2. Cezanne-Picasso > Gertrude Stein
VIII.2.3. Schoenberg > Kandinsky
VIII. 2.4. Rothko > Morton Feldman
VIII.2.5. Webern > Augusto de Campos
VIII.2.6. Gertrude Stein > Burrows & Fargion
VIII.2.7. Gertrude Stein > Queiroz (Aquino & Aguiar)
IX. 2.8. Cage > Cunningham
IX. Pragmatism and Cognitive Aesthetics — implications from Peircean perspective
VIII.1. Intermedial processes in learning and abductive inference
VIII.2. Intermediality in oral poetry improvisation
VIII.3. Final discussion