Cell Language Theory, The: Connecting Mind And Matter

The Philosophical Implications of the Cell Language Theory 403

“6x9” b2861 The Cell Language Theory: Connecting Mind and Matter

Evidently, the BCT model of the sign is identical with Spink’s sign

tetrahedron, except that (a) X is replaced with P, the sign processor, the

need for which was emphasized in [393], and (ii) Gnergy is explicitly

introduced as a new element of the sign, providing the requisite thermo-

dynamic driving force and control information for sign processes or

semiosis. It is obvious that to invoke sign processes (and thought pro-

cesses) without identifying the source of free energy needed for driving,

semiosis would be incomplete and violate the laws of thermodynamics.

Also, it is essential that the sign processor, P, be explicitly indicated in all

sign processes, since, as Spink correctly points out, the semantics of a sign

is critically dependent on the nature of P, without which the semantic

space vanishes [393–395]. It should be pointed out that P, in Figure 10.3,

may correspond to or is closely related to the infological parameter in

Burgin’s general theory of information [37].

It is suggested here that BCT shown in Figure 10.3 represents the

most complete description of the sign so far formulated, taking into

account not only the informational aspect of signs as emphasized by

traditional semioticians, including Peirce and Spinks, but also the

energetic/dynamic aspect whose importance having been clearly recog-

nized with the emergence of microsemiotics, the study of molecular

signs [23].

P

|

|

|

|

_ G

_ / \

_ / \

O / \

/ I

R

Figure 10.3 The Peircean sign depicted as a BCT, which represents the unit of thought

called the “thoughton”. G = Gnergy; P = Sign Processor; R = Representamen; O = object;

and I = Interpretant.

b2861_Ch-10.indd 403 17-10-2017 12:13:26 PM