Везде
Animals’ Signs and Human’s Symbols: Mutual Influence of J. von UexküIl’s and E. Cassirer’s Ideas
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Animals’ Signs and Human’s Symbols: Mutual Influence of J. von UexküIl’s and E. Cassirer’s Ideas
Annotation
PII
S023620070005902-9-
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Helena N. Knyazeva 
ORCID: 0000-0003-0577-0170
Occupation: Professor of the School of Philosophy
Affiliation: National Research University Higher School of Economics
Address: 20 Myasnitskaya Str., Moscow 101000, Russian Federation
Edition
Volume 30 Issue 4
Pages
25-40
Abstract

Some ways of mutual influence of the theoretical biology of Jakob von UexküIl and the philosophy of symbolic forms of Ernst Cassirer are discussed in the article. Although Cassirer to a large extent emphasized the differences between the human world as the world of a symbolic being from the animal world as the world of an organism whose behavior is built due to its ability to recognize signs and signals described by UexküIl, Cassirer's attention to the important concept of Umwelt introduced by UexküIl allowed him to detail and refine his theoretical conception. Both scientists fruitfully developed and applied interdisciplinary research strategies: Cassirer, realizing his genuine interest in theoretical biology, and UexküIl, extending his concept of Umwelt to the human world.

Keywords
biosemiotics, sign, world of life, cognitive world, Ernest Cassirer, signal, symbolic form, Jakob von UexküIl, Umwelt
Received
17.07.2019
Date of publication
30.07.2019
Number of purchasers
90
Views
3129
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Previous versions
S023620070005902-9-1 Дата внесения правок в статью - 17.07.2019
Cite   Download pdf

References

1. Cassirer E. Izbrannoe. Opyt o cheloveke [Selected Works. An Essay on Man]. Moscow: Gardarika Publ., 1998.

2. Cassirer E. Filosofiya simvolicheskih form. T. 1. Yazyk [Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Vol. 3. Language]. Moscow; Sankt-Petersburg: University Book Publ., 2002.

3. Cassirer E. Filosofiya simvolicheskih form. T. 3. Fenomenologiya poznaniya [Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Vol. 3. The Phenomenology of Knowledge]. Moscow; St. Petersburg: University Book Publ., 2002.

4. Lorenz K. Kantovskaya koncepciya a priori v svete sovremennoj biologii [Kant’s Conception of a priori in the Light of the Modern Biology]. Ehvolyucionnaya ehpistemologiya. Antologiya [Evolutionary Epistemology. Antology]. Moscow: Center of Humanitarian Initiatives Publ., 2012.

5. Popper K. Ob’ektivnoe znanie. Evolyucionnyj podhod [Objective Knowledge. An Evolutionary Approach]. Moscow: Editorial URSS Publ., 2002.

6. Wilson E.O. Biofiliya: Vrozhdennaya tyaga k zhivomu kak svyaz’ cheloveka s drugimi biologicheskimi vidami [Biophilia. The Human Bond with Other Species]. Moscow: URSS, LENAND Publ., 2017.

7. Scheler M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Selected Works]. Moscow: Gnosis Publ., 1994.

8. Brentari C. Jakob von Uexküll. The Discovery of the Umwelt between Biosemiotics and Theoretical Biology. Dordrecht; Heidelberg; NY; L.: Springer Publ., 2015.

9. Kull K. Uexküll and the Post-modern Evolutionism. Sign Systems Studies. 2004. Vol. 32. N 1/2. P. 99–114.

10. Snowdon Ch. T. Contextually Flexible Communication in Nonhuman Primates. Evolution of communicative flexibility. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press Publ., 2008.

11. Stjernfelt F. Simple Animals and Complex Biology: Von Uexküll’s Two-Fold Influence on Cassirer’s Philosophy. Synthesis. 2011. Vol. 179. P. 173.

12. Tønnessen M. The Search Image as Link Between Sensation, Perception and Action. BioSystems. 2018. Vol. 164. P. 138–146.

13. Uexküll J. von. Theoretische Biologie. 12. Auflage. Berlin: Springer Publ., 1928.

14. Uexküll J. von. Wie sehen wir die Natur und wie sieht sie sich selber? Die Naturwissenschaften. 1922. Jg. 10. Hf. 12.

15. Uexküll J. von, Kriszat G. Streifzuge durch die Umwelten von Tieren und Menschen. Frankfurt: S. Fischer Publ., 1970.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate