Biosemiotik

Christoph Barmeyer / Petia Genkowa / Jörg Scheffer (Hgg.): Kommunikation und Kulturwissenschaft: Grundbegriffe, Wissenschaftsdisziplinen, Kulturräume. Passau: Stutz (Zweite, erw. Auflage), S. 207-225., 2011

Zeitschrift für Semiotik, 2018

Despite their satisfactory speech recognition capabilities, current speech assis-tive devices still lack suitable automatic semantic analysis tools as well as useful representations of world knowledge. Instead, current technologies require users to learn the command words necessary to effectively operate and work with a machine. Such a machine centered approach is not only frustrating for users, recognizing one basic difference between the semiotics of humans and machines makes this also unnecessary: For a machine, the meaning of a (human) utterance is defined by its scope of action. Machines, thus, do not need to understand the meanings of individual words, nor the meaning of phrasal and sentence semantics that combine individual word meanings with additional implicit world knowledge. For speech assistive devices, the learning of machine specific meanings of human utterances by trial and error should be sufficient. Using the trivial example of a cognitive heating device, we will show that-based on Skinner's learning theory-this process can be formalized as the learning of utterance-meaning pairs (UMP). This is followed by a detailed semiotic contextualization of the previously generated signs.

In: Andrea Bartl, Susanne Düwell, Christof Hamann und Oliver Ruf (Hg.): Handbuch Kriminalliteratur. Theorien – Geschichte – Medien. Stuttgart/Weimar: Metzler 2018, 82–90

Handbuch der Semiotik

Springer eBooks, 1996

Dieser Text gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Zunächst wird der Begriff und die Entstehung der Biopolitik anhand von Michel Foucaults Perspektive erläutert, anschließend am Beispiel der Gesundheit(spolitik) vertieft und dann auf aktuelle Phänomene bezogen (Stichworte Entgrenzung der Medizin und Enhancement). Der zweite Teil beschäftigt sich mit der Verbindung von Biopolitik und (Neo)Liberalismus und wird mit einer Kritik am Humanismus enden.

Biosemantics is an inclusive naturalistic philosophical account of the intentional content of both mental and linguistic representations. As it is well known, Millikan explains the normative dimension of intentional content in terms of natural function. However, Millikan’s account (and its reception) suffers from three fundamental problems (1) Usually, her account is not situated in the suitable philosophical tradition, in my view, this tradition is classical pragmatism (Peirce, Mead, Morris) and the pragmatist themes in Sellars’ philosophy, and not classical cognitive science (or Fodorian Psychosemantics). The first chapter of the book is, thus, an exercise in re-contextualization. (2) Biosemantics has neither a philosophically satisfactory notion of naturalism nor a very clear idea of normativity. I claim that biosemantics needs both, a non-reductionist notion of naturalism (I call it “Biological Naturalism”) and a unified account of normativity. Chapters 2 and 3 are dedicated to these tasks. (3) Millikan’s account of perception is underdeveloped. By taking up arguments and distinctions from Thomas Reid, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and J.J. Gibson chapter 5 establishes a theory of the non-conceptual content of (visual) perception in a biosemantic framework. The manuscript is in need of revision on two different levels: Firstly, the architecture of the book is not clear enough, it contains too much material, and the exposition of Millikan’s point of view could be more straight forward. Secondly, two important arguments do not work in their present shape, namely the argument for self-consciousness in non-human animals (section 4.4) and the argument from animalism against the infamous swampman problem (sections 4.1-4.3). I have received many valuable comments, suggestions, and criticisms. Obviously, my current SNF-Project at the University of Fribourg “Biosemantics and Normative Pragmatism (Millikan and Brandom)” is a continuation of the Habilitation into the realms of concepts, thought, and self-consciousness."

2017

In den gender studies verweist der Begriff Biopolitik zumeist auf die Arbeiten von Michel Foucault, in denen er untersucht, wie in der Moderne die Organisation von und die Sorge um Leben sowie der menschliche Individualkörper ins Zentrum der Politik rücken. Ergänzend bestimmt er Biomacht als im Gegensatz zu früherer, repressiver Macht, produktiv und auf Lebenssteigerung ausgelegt. Entsprechend impliziert Biopolitik eine ambivalente, ebenso fürsorgliche wie kontrollierende Form der Machtausübung

Chemie Ingenieur Technik, 2008

2013