Biosemiotic research and Affective Neuroscience
is focused on the multi layered communication inside of the every organism that is effect of reference of informations that appears in the each living cell transmitted by the different media like temperature, chemical substances, light, electric field etc. Neuroscience is concentrated on exploring the last one because body of the mammals is controlled by the mind with usage of electricity and electric field of mind and it can tell us much more about organism because nervous system is controlling the other body parts. The nervous system appears to be parasite-like form that had dominated the other forms of communication inside of the body by the strongest produced impulses. More intense affects! Also significant difference between the two ways of research is that biosemiotics is much closer to deal with sign and affects as information transmitted by the each cell as something intentional, not mechanical. In case of living forms thats correct but how the conscious life form appear in the physical world, and what is a difference between them and the non-living things. Neuroscience seems to be much closer to the perspective of the semiotics as something what appears in the brain, not in the cell nor dead matter.
Two ways are touching the same matter from the two different perspectives where Pierce (intentional nature of sign) is actually discussing from behind the grave with the Deleuze (machinism). The key point is the question about something cannot be answered – about intention and spiritual nature of universe. No it is not just funny – it is funny as much as serious!
The mechanicism and intentional nature of sign understood as affects exchange in the body by the chemical substances or other signals like temperature or electric impulses. Are they intentional or not? Who cares if they are consciousness itself. We can be sure about feedback between the mind and the body. That’s true, but is there any intention where new organism appear from the “dust” like embrion. Process of creation of the mind is purely mechanical and is transcoded by the other organism into the DNA. Egg was first thus?
Processual nature of the life cannot give other answer than evolutionary change from the mechanical and repetitive process into the system of life.
In the meantime we need to find the other effect of the two different points of view on that matter. If the Deleuze is right about the basic things, the Pierce will give us tools to describe affects vocabulary. I had divided the Affects on two different kinds where we can see affect as collective voted by the each cell decision of the organism controlled by the central unit of the brain, and affect as every cell activity. The process of cognition stops here if we will not take a deep gaze in the biosemiotic research. Biosemiotics can give us the right perspective to build vocabulary of affects that are used by the body to create communication system of the whole body. I was described in the past some different ways how the communication can appear and affects can be processed by the transcoding from one medium (electromagnetic) into the other (chemical, or others). But the true base for this vocabulary I had found in the text of Günther Witzany.
That’s all what I want to say for now! Here I am recently.
Günther Witzany, Plant Communication from Biosemiotic Perspective, Plant Signaling & Behavior 1:4, 169-178, July/August 2006, http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/psb/abstract.php?id=3163