scholarly journals Introducing Biosemiotic Ethics

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 3-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Tønnessen ◽  
Jonathan Beever ◽  
Yogi Hale Hendlin

In this introduction to the special issue on Biosemiotic Ethics, we introduce major concepts and themes corresponding to the topic. With reference to Ivar Puura’s notion of “semiocide”, we ask: what are the ethical responsibilities that attention to semiotics carries? We argue that if life is fundamentally semiotic, then biosemiotics and moral theory should be explored in conjunction, rather than separately. Biosemiotic ethics becomes relevant whenever one complex of signs impinges on another; particularly whenever human sign usage impinges on the wellbeing or sustainable functioning of human or non-human semiotic agents. Stable coexistence of sign systems is far from inevitable, but it is a meaningful goal that can be pursued. In complex ecosystems, for example, certain types of coexistent relationships have evolved to share space despite competitive needs and expressions. We describe the ways in which authors in this volume articulate various justifications for the view that what is morally relevant is semiosis. Given these perspectives in a growing approach to understanding moral relationships, biosemiotic ethics has the decisive advantage of drawing on contemporary biosemiotics’ empirically-informed biological acuity within a rich semiotic framework.

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 616-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen

In this commentary, I reply to the fourteen papers published in the Sign Systems Studies special issue on Peirce’s Theory of Signs, with a view on connecting some of their central themes and theses and in putting some of the key points in those papers into a wider perspective of Peirce’s logic and philosophy.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaus-Uwe Panther

AbstractIn this article, I offer some comments on the general theme “The Study of Linguistic Sign Systems in the 21st Century” of this special issue of


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Kathryn Sikkink

Abstract Kratochwil's critique of rights as a dominant moral theory that cannot avoid ‘hegemonic’ politics appears to be too crude. This article suggests that more theoretical and practical attention to the responsibilities necessary to implement rights could address some of Kratochwil's concerns. The language of political and ethical responsibilities is often missing from the practical action discourse of human rights. The article emphasizes the multitude of potential ‘agents of justice’ and how they can discharge forward-looking responsibilities in open and discretionary ways.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document