Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 08:53:41 -0800 (PST)
From: Mark Crosby <crosby_m-AT-rocketmail.com>
Subject: Ecosemiotics [was: God help us, back to...]


> > "Could it be because there's no such thing as an
uninterpreted fact?"
> > First of all, this is bullshit. Away with
interpretation. [CUT]

> 	Read you Nietzsche and Philosophy:  all existence
is valuation and evaluation.  This need not be
self-referential, or anthropomorphic. Further, there
are no facts, only interpretations -- that is why
each 'fact' must be brought back to a will to power
that would will its being. [CUT]

If I may apply some filters here, perhaps this debate
about what the Pow-Wow Person experienced can be
interpreted at another level.  I read an interesting
online paper by Kalevi Kull yesterday, "Semiotic
ecology: different natures in the semiosphere" at
http://www.zbi.ee/~kalevi/ecosem.htm , where Kull
describes "multiple natures":

"Zero nature is nature itself (e.g., absolute
wilderness). First nature is the nature as we see,
identify, describe and interpret it. Second nature is
the nature which we have materially interpreted, this
is materially translated nature, i.e. a changed
nature, a produced nature. Third nature is a virtual
nature, as it exists in art and science...

Zero nature, at least when living, is changing via
ontological semiosis, or via physiosemiosis if
applying J. Deely's term. The first nature is nature
as filtered via human semiosis, through the
interpretations in our social and personal knowledge.
This is categorised nature. The second nature is
changing as a result of 'material processes' again,
this is a 'material translation' in the form of true
semiotic translation, since it interconnects the zero
and the first (or third), controlling the zero nature
on the basis of the imaginary nature. The third
nature is entirely theoretical or artistic,
non-natural nature-like nature, built on the basis of
the first (or third itself) with the help of the
second...

0 - zero nature is - nature from nature
1 - first nature is - image from nature
2 - second nature is - nature from image
3 - third nature is - image from image"

Kull's sketch is definitely related to Peirce, and
probably Guattari says something along these lines,
but I'm still trying to relate this to "The Image of
Thought"...

Mark (baffled by smoke and mirrors)

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free -AT-yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com