User:Semiotico/sandbox

Semiotic Thinking
 •	1. Overview'''

•	'''2. Origins of the term

•	3. History

•	4. Hallmarks of semiotic thinking

o	4.1 Uncovering meaning

o	4.2 Modeling systems

o	4.3 Problem solving

o	4.4 Multi-disciplinarity

•	5. Semiotic thinking versus semiotic theory

•	6. Drivers of semiotic thinking '''

o	6.1 Brands and branding'''

o	6.2 Our digital sensorium

o	6.3 Global visual culture

o	6.4 The learning economy

•	7. See Also

•	8. References

1. Overview

Semiotics thinking is thinking about signs and meaning in a sustained and rigorous manner. The subject of semiotics has a mixed and confusing heritage and is both theoretically heterogeneous and contested in its definition. What both scholars and practitioners can agree on is that semiotics is an enquiry into meaning. It has also been connected with philosophical reflections on ‘representation’ (Marcel Danesi, pages 582-583). Stuart Hall (1997) in the book Representation draws upon semiotics.

In Handbook of Semiotics Volume 3 (2003) Roland Posner sets out in an article ‘The relationship between individual disciplines and interdisciplinary approaches’ the vocational and epistemological criteria for a subject to qualify as a discipline. These are: 1. homogenous domain, 2. unified perspective, 3. central method, 4. core body of knowledge or 5. dominant means of presentation. In the case of semiotic thinking, unified perspective is underscored as the key. Posner writes: “semiotics studies all objects from the perspective of their functioning in sign processes” (2003, p. 2366). Whilst arguably all academic disciples involve extracting meaning from signs via analysis, semiotics distinguishes itself both because it has developed rich conceptual tools for analyzing how meaning is constructed via signs as abstracted entities in all cultural domains and media range from the realm of computer science (Andersen, 1997) to biology (Hoffmeyer, 1997) and more lately Favareau in Biosemiotics (2010).

Semiotic thinking (as opposed to semiotic theory, below) is what makes semiotics a sensibility, set of practices and craft skills. This sensibility is about tracing the nuance of meaning and paying attention to how we construct meaning via signs and striving to cultivate sensitivity and self-reflexivity in this task. In all communicational media whether design, advertising, or in visual arts semiotics is the conscience of meaning.

2. Origins of the term

The term semiotics itself goes back to the ancient Greek – it derives from the Greek for sign or semeion. Certainly, ‘semiotics’ + ‘thinking’ is not a couplet often used in traditional scholarly texts. Semiotic thinking seems to be a term is of recent coinage. The development of a specific type of thinking designated as ‘semiotic thinking’ is partly connected to the commodification of academic subjects and the packaging of individual methodologies as modular tools for commercial application such as ‘design thinking’. Semiotic thinking has, however, developed separately from design thinking although they do share common features. Semiotic thinking is belatedly becoming recognized as a mode of thought with its own hallmarks which are outlined below.

Semiotic thinking is celebrated in the commercial world on the Semiotic Thinking Group a professional networking group on Linked In. The Semiotic Thinking Group (founded in March 2010) is an online forum for knowledge sharing and debates on all aspects on semiotics. The discourses on this group are examples of semiotic thinking. Participants in debates engage in debates and post queries about all aspects of semiotics regardless of their academic status or formal qualification. In this way marketers, qualitative researchers, anthropologists and others engage in problem solving using semiotics. Semiofest is a non-profit organization based in the UK whose mission is to propagate and celebrate semiotic thinking through annual events. Semiofest is billed as a ‘celebration of semiotic thinking’. It showcases a wide range of methodological case studies of semiotics applied to branding and communication. Carlos Scolari, Professor of Media at University of Barcelona, and keynote speaker at the Barcelona Semiofest in 2013 tweeted @cscolari on Twitter on June 1st 2013: “are the best conversations around semiotics happening outside the universities?”

3. History

American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce, considered one of the two founders of semiotics, was loquacious on the subject of semiotic thinking. He argued that all human beings think exclusively through signs. He suggested that our thinking was a product of semiosis (the three way spiral between Representamen, Object and what her called the Interpretant) (Peirce, 1958). He stressed the idea of abductive thinking as opposed to induction or deduction, which he said was the only source of original thought. This was a mixture of instinct and intuition (Paavola, 2004) and he called it the ‘conjectural paradigm’. Peirce poignantly described his own thought process as involving a ‘play of musement’ – a mystical form of gentle, undirected contemplation which led to discovering new ideas. This is very akin to the idea of semiotic thinking.

A great impetus to the development of the idea of semiotic thinking has been the work of Roland Barthes. His influential little book Mythologies (1967), a collection of serialized essays, applied the semiological perspective (the French for semiotics) to a miscellany of topics within mid 1960s French popular culture at the time. Barthes’s purpose was to unveil the workings of bourgeois ideology and its attendant myths. He freely blended semiotic theory (an initial essay entitled Myth Today) with more journalistic commentary. This popular little book has influenced what is now called semiotics and its uses outside academia. Semiotic thinking is widely used within popular marketing literature (not called semiotics) for example Culture Code by Clotaire Rapaille (2007) and Cultural Strategy by Holt and Cameron (2010) are both in debt to the semiotic cast of thinking in terms of dissecting brands as cultural texts.

'''4. Hallmarks of semiotic thinking '''

Semiotics studies the way we make sense of the world and how we make meaning. We can only make meaning through our senses and how these senses read signs. One of prerequisites for thinking semiotically is recognizing the contingency of one’s own perspective; how mediated it is by our mental schema and cultural background. Most of the time it goes unnoticed how conditioned we are to make interpretations. Many interpretations we make in everyday life, in particular in communication are habitual and unthinking. Semiotic thinking seeks to scrutinise this process, to lay bare its operation and the extent to which we are subject to the conditioning of both our communication and cultural contexts. Kaie Kotov, Senior Lecturer at Tartu University Estonia writes on the Semiotic Thinking Group in February 2011. “One principle of the semiotic approach is that a multiplicity of meanings and a lack of determined pathways in human communication is a painful but necessary proviso where every message is interpreted against the backdrop of multiple codes and contexts”. It is a recurring thread in this topic that a sense of estrangement is a necessary prerequisite for semiotic thinking. This necessity for de-familiarization was introduced by Russian Formalists such as Viktor Shklovksy (Art as Technique). This is a prerequisite for any semiotic thinker to notice, make explicit and theorise what may lay hidden for others.

4.1 Uncovering meaning

Semiotic thinking usually functions to make the invisible visible and bring to light unconsidered meanings. In the 1960s, semiotics or semiology was to be implicated in a counter cultural ideological agenda and exposing power structures. Semiology as promoted by Roland Barthes in his famous essay Myth Today was a key to understanding how myth works at a deeper level. Denotative was the surface and taken for granted level, connotative meaning was lurking beneath the surface and revealed ideologies at work. Semiotics is less ideologically monolithic as a tool today, but digging deeper is still a facet of most semiotic thinking. Semiotic thinking is driven by a compulsion to uncover meaning and to account for how and why given communication works the way it does. Canadian semiotician Marcel Danesi in his Puzzle Instinct (2004, Indiana University Press) argued that puzzling out meaning is a universal human trait and that we are all semiotic animals. In semiotic thinking, unraveling meaning is approached somewhat systematically like a scientist but is open to leaps of insight and lateral thinking redolent of the artist. Semiotic thinking has been compared by some (Eco, Sebeok, 1983) to detective work in its emphasis on forensic reading and uncovering meaning. Neuroscientist Ramachandran in his book Tell Tale Brain (Heinemann, 2011) and others have argued that the desire for certain visual patterns are hard wired. Neuro-Aesthetics (2009) uses insights from cognitive science understanding of brain processes to explain visual preference.

4.2 Modeling systems

Modeling is another hallmark of semiotic thinking. Modeling is a way that human beings have of describing and understanding our reality. Semiotics specializes in creating models to explain how communication and meaning work. Topological thinking and mapping is part of the means of presentation. This type of modeling was a fundamental part of Tartu school semiotics founded by Juri Lotman in Estonia. In his book Universe of the Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture (Tauris, 1990) Lotman introduced the concept of the semiosphere a zone of thought isotopic with the human mind seething and churning with cultural texts and codes. He also posited a model of centres and borders as a mechanism for explicating cultural dynamism. The idea of visual modeling has been taken further by Sternfelt (2007) who argues for the rather crucial role played by diagrams ‘a skeleton like sketch of relations’ in helping us think. The sign theory in both Sausurrian (signifier-signified) and Peircean (trichotomies) paradigms both use basic visual models to show how signs link to referents. Roman Jacobson uses a communication model to postulate how meaning works on the basis of codes and media and Greimas (1990) developed the semiotic square to show how semantic universes are organized into systems of actual and virtual relations.

The book Modeling Systems Theory (2000) by Marcel Danesi and Thomas Sebeok described language as our primary modeling system and that other communication systems of cultural, expression (art, music) are our secondary and tertiary modeling systems. Danesi also coined the term ‘metaform’ to describe how a form of meaning can be translated through gesture and in verbal metaphor too. In semiotic thinking models are used simply to model reality but can also be used to stimulate creative discovery. Fresh thinking yields fresh models and in turn fresh models, fresh thinking.

4.3 Problem solving

What distinguishes semiotic thinking from orthodox semiotics in the university is a problem solving orientation. Semiotic thinking is usually to real life communication problems. It is geared to understanding phenomena with non-obvious solutions. Helping the general public to understand the meaning within a new Olympic logo a new operating system iconography or viral meme comes into the province of semiotic thinking. Semiotics thinking as applied to brands, marketing and in communications design is directed to solving problems. This could involve generating strategic options. In this sense it is parallel to design thinking. Semiotic thinking, if fulfilling its mission needs to end in insights, results or tangible recommendations. Some semiotics in scholarly books, monographs and journal articles can amount to rehearsals of well established theoretical positions. Semiotic thinking privileges fresh, thinking applied to specific problems and is geared to clarifying issues rather than rehashing theories.

4.4 Multi-disciplinarity

Meaning is such an elusive and slippery concept to account for that it can necessitate several different inputs. Semiotics stands in a symbiotic relationship with more clearly demarcated academic disciplines. It both borrows from and contributes to disciplines such as art theory, literary theory and anthropology. Semiotic thinking develops via mutual enrichment and cross-fertilization and makes broad connections across silos. Semiotic thinking is flexible and trans-disciplinary. To use a computing metaphor, it is an operating system of meaning that incorporates sub–disciplines as applications. Examples are hybrid areas such as bio-semiotics (looking at sign processes amongst biological organisms) and cognitive semiotics (blending a semiotic perspective with cognitive neuroscience) or cyber semiotics (blends semiotics with information theory). For instance, in order to truly understand the meaning of music soundtracks semiotic thinking would blend musicology to analyse the structure and musical character and sound design and neuroscience and cognitive science to understand the brains reflex response to such things as timbre, volume but cultural semiotics in order to trace the surreptitious inter-textual links made by the music and important cultural substrate. Attempts in this vein have been made by maverick scholars like Philip Tagg (2013). A prototypical example of multi-disciplinarity is “Cyber-Semiotics: Why Information is Not Enough!” by Soren Brier (2008) geared “to understand the role of embodied mind in cognition and communication” (p.4) and “based on Peircean semiotics, cybernetics, Luhmann’s systems theory, cognitive semantics and language games theory” (p.4). In analyzing the development of logos an understanding of medieval heraldry and the the development of intellectual property law might be important but the semiotic view would be essential to pull together a holistic understanding of how word, letterform and metaphor work together to create meaning as shown by Mollerup (1997). Carlos Scolari views multi-disciplinarity as a key impetus to the rejuvenation of semiotics.

5. Semiotic thinking versus semiotic theory

Semiotic theory refers to a rubric of doctrines. Semiotic thinking differs from semiotic theory because it is a more palpably dynamic process ruminating about signs, sign systems and their significance. Theory comes closest to the spirit of semiotic thinking when it is used as a probe to investigate areas and furthest away when it entails rigid interpretation. Semiotic theory is at home in the university where teaching stresses the acquisition and assessment of a rubric. Semiotic thinking refers to the bundle of techniques, craft skills, instincts and tacit knowledge of applied thinkers in action. Much academic work is tethered to citation of previous scholarly work and referral to orthodox frameworks rather than privileging the process of cogitation itself. Semiotic thinking sits in the gaps between the frameworks. It is, to use an analogy, a lubricant between the cogs of theory that animates and brings to life models and frameworks.

'''6. Drivers of semiotic thinking '''

6.1 Brands and branding

Semiotics has become a more prominent methodology in consumer insight and in marketing because it offers a sophisticated, systematic understanding of brands. Semiotic thinking takes brands as clusters of consumable signs that are primarily designed too give company products and services distinctive cohesive meanings. Semiotic thinking is valued in this space because it helps to makes sense of and to mediate between business and the amorphous realm of visual and consumer culture. The increasing value of intangible assets, branded properties and a rapidly changing communication landscape and ever more cluttered and saturated marketplaces has helped to drive interest in and demand for semiotic thinking as a differentiating force. A good account of this is given by Laura Oswald in her Marketing Semiotics (2012).

Since the 1980s semiotics has been applied as a research and insight tool in marketing. There was a critical mass of practitioners in France, led by the academic and marketing consultant Jean Marie Floch (2001) conducting projects to help in ad development for companies such as Renault. There was also a brief florescence of interest in North America in the 1980s under the auspices of David Mick And Umiker-Sebeok. Later, a brand of critical theory and structural anthropology inspired thinking methods came to prominence in the UK in the 1980s under the direction of Virginia Valentine at Semiotic Solutions. The commercial realm is a good example of the spirit of semiotic thinking since the ore of semiotic theory has been extracted and liberally merged with approaches such as Freudian psychoanalytic theory, neo Marxist and cultural theory, art theory and other philosophical traditions that offer new insights.

6.2 Our digital sensorium

Semiotics as a study of how signs in our environment make meaning is also being driven by high and widening broadband internet penetration across the world and our deepening enmeshment with multiple platforms as participants, subscribers or co-creators. Semiotic thinking helps to take stock of changes, such as the changing nature of the logo, or transmedia narratives, or even the changing nature of creativity in art or papers on online brands such as that written by Carlos Scolari (Semiotica, 2008) Arguably this is where this term semiotic thinking comes into its own since traditional semiotic theories are usually too rigid and anachronistic to be applicable to a multi layered and amorphous semiotic landscape. In general, semiotic thinking is a response to the proliferation of forms of meaning and new phenomena that have not yet been adequately conceptualized even though often commented upon in the press.

6.3 Global visual culture

Semiotic thinking has proceeded with the development in global communication. The development of global branding, appetite for brands in so called developing markets and the growing clout of non Western markets have all given impetus to a broadly semiotic approach. Semiotic thinking can be a useful as a translation mechanism between different cultures. For cultural critics and brand owners it can help show how concepts translate across cultural context. A shared visual culture but persistent local preferences has made meaning problematic and semiotics is pertinent to bring clarity in this scenario. On the other hand, semiotics is also part of media literacy as written about by Elliot Gaines in his book Media Literacy and Semiotics (2010). Susan Petrilli and Augusto Ponzio in Semiotics Unbounded (2007) postulate that semiotics should can play a leading role in creating healthy media ecosystems and has a responsibility to invigilate the state of global communication. They even coin the term semio-ethics. Certainly, semiotic thinking is directly related to visual and media literacy, respecting otherness in identity or maintaining the communicational diversity of the semiosphere or simply improving the efficiency or quality of communication and in reducing noise.

6.4 The learning economy

According to John Grant (Profile, 2003), we now live in a ‘learning economy’ in which one’s knowledge acquisition does not stop after school or university. This curiosity about what things mean and how they come to mean what they mean also drives semiotic thinking. This is made more acute by a cultural climate dealing with more data and information than ever but where ordinary citizens are more suspicious of institutions. The motivation for studying semiotics has changed. More students come to an interest in semiotics from a background in design, marketing, PR and in visual culture as opposed from a philosophy or general humanities background. There is a more utilitarian attitude and desire on the part of students to know what they can do with semiotics and how it can equip them with transferable skills not just theories.

More students in the disciplines of design and communication want skills that can differentiate them within highly competitive employment markets. Yet there are few full courses in semiotics in universities and what is offered is often lacks a problem solving orientation. Semiotic thinking is directed to feed this need for practicalities.

7. See Also

Semiotics

Design Thinking

Methodology

Cybernetics

Mindfulness

8. References

Academic Texts

Andersen, Peter Bogh, Signs of Meaning in the Universe (Advances in Semiotics) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997)

Barthes, Roland Mythologies (Editions de Seuil, 1967)

Berger, John Ways of Seeing (1973)

Brier, Soren Cyber Semiotics: Why Information is Not Enough (Toronto: UTP, 2008)

Danesi, Marcel (ed.) Encyclopedia of Media and Communications (UofT Press, 2013)

Eco, Umberto and Thomas Sebeok, Dupin, Holmes, Peirce: The Sign of Three (Indiana University Press, 1983)

Favareau, Donald Essential Readings in Biosemiotics: Anthology and Commentary (Springer: 2010)

Floch, Jean-Marie Semiotics, Marketing and Communication (Basingstoke, Palgrave, 2001)

Gaines, Elliott Media Literacy and Semiotics (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010)

Gladwell, Malcolm Blink: the Power of Thinking Without Thinking (London: Penguin, 2006)

Grant, John After Image: Mind Altering Marketing (Profile, 2002)

Greimas, Algirdas The Social Sciences: A Semiotic View (Minnesota University Press, 1990)

Hall, Stuart Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices (Culture, Media and Identities series) (London: Sage: 1997)

Holt, Douglas & Douglas Cameron Cultural Strategy (Oxford: OUP, 2010)

Hoffmeyer, Jesper Signs of Meaning in the Universe (Advances in Semiotics) (Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1997)

Kress, Gunther & Theo van Leeuwen The Grammar of Visual Design (London: Routledge, 2006)

Lotman, Yuri Universe of The Mind: A Semiotic Theory of Culture (London: I.B. Tauris, 2001)

Mollerup, Per Marks of Excellence: the history and taxonomy of trademarks (London: Phaidon Press, 1997)

Oswald, Laura Marketing Semiotics: Signs, Strategies and Brand Value (OUP; 2012)

Paavola, Sami ‘Peircean Abduction: Instinct or Inference’ Semiotica (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter) 2005, No 153, pps (131-154)

Peirce, Charles The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (1958)

Petrilli, Susan and Ponzio, Augusto Interpretive Routes through the Open Network of Signs (Toronto: UTP, 2005)

Posner, Roland, Robering, Klaus, Thomas Sebeok (eds.) Semiotik: A Handbook on the Sign-Theoretic Foundations of Nature and Culture (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2003)

Ramchandran, V.S. The Tell Tale Brain (Heinemann, 2011)

Rapaille, Clotaire The Culture Code: An Ingenious Way to Understand Why People Around the World Buy and Live as They Do (Broadway Books, 2007)

Scolari, Carlos Alberto ‘Online brands: branding, possible worlds and interactive grammars’ Semiotica, April 2008 Issue 169 pages 169-188

Sebeok, Thomas and Danesi, Marcel Modelling Systems Theory (UTP: 2003)

Shklovsky, Viktor "Art as Technique": pages 15-21 Literary Theory: An Anthology. (Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2004)

Skov, Martin and Oshin Vartanian Neuroaesthetics (Baywood: 2009)

Sternfelt, Fredrik Diagrammatology: An Investigation on the Borderlines of Phenomenology, Ontology and Semiotics (Springer, 2007)

Tagg, Philip Music’s Meanings: a modern musicology for non-musos (MMMSP, 2013)

Valentine, Virginia ‘Semiotics, what now, my love?’ MRS Conference Paper 2007

Online Resources

www.semiofest.com www.semionaut.com www.linkedin.com