CRISTIN reporting for 2023: 35 posts

Today I have finished registered 2023 activities in Cristin, the Current Research Information System in Norway, totaling 35 posts, which brings the total of my profile page to 355. The 2023 activities include 3 scientific articles, one of which a brief communication, two book chapters, an earlier journal article now reprinted as a book chapter, and the softcover version of the book Semiotic agency: Science beyond mechanism which I co-wrote with Alexei Sharov, 8 scientific conference talks, 2 brief reports (or rather consultative statements) issued by Norway´s Council for animal ethics, and 3 interviews.

#8

Today I have had an article writing day, writing day #8 this Spring; with some 400 words added to the article "Hva Arne Næss kan lære oss om økonomifagets tverrfaglighet" which I co-write with Jan Karlstrøm and Thomas Hylland Eriksen.

#7

Today I have had a writing day, the 7th so far this Spring, devoted to various tasks including some work on my book project Captured: CCS and the fight for the soul of the environmental movement, reporting of scientific publications from 2023, and a little initial work on my article "Applied Umwelt theory – in the context of descriptive phenomenology and phenomenological triangulation", with some 100 words written.

Text on the evolutionary origin of Umwelt featured in Middlesex University Reading group session

My brief commentary article "The Evolutionary Origin(s) of the Umwelt. Biosemiotics" is included in this Spring´s readings for the reading group “Signs in Nature” at Middlesex University, along with Jablonka and Ginsburg´s Target article "Learning and the Evolution of Conscious Agents". This will happen in the session "Consciousness and Umwelt", which takes place Friday April 19th online.

Opponent at Mathias Klitgård´s 90% ph.d. seminar

Today I have served as the internal opponent at Mathias Klitgård´s 90 % ph.d. seminar devoted to discussion of their work, at University of Stavanger, digitally. Birgit Kaiser was the external opponent.

Lecture on the climate crisis and psychology given

Today I have given a lecture on the climate crisis and psychology in the University of Stavanger´s master course on environmental psychology (MPS180), as part of master in psychology. About 15 people attended.

#6

Today I have had the 6th article writing day this Spring, with work done on the article on Arne Næss´ views on economics that I co-write with Jan Karlstrøm and Thomas Hylland Eriksen.

3 hours of lectures in master course on the welfare state

Today I have lectured for 3 hours on the topics of autonomy and paternalism in a Master course on the welfare state (MSO121). This is my only teaching in this course, which resembles but is not identical to a course I taught in some years back.

#5, first draft of "Ecological semiotics" chapter finished and submitted

Today I have had an article writing day devoted to finish a first draft of my chapter for the 3rd edition of Encyclopedia of ecology, "Ecological semiotics", with some 1.800 words written, the most so far this year in one day. I also submitted the manuscript to Elsevier´s system. I have further work to do during revisions. The number of writing days so far this Spring is now 5.

"Wonderful world" editorial board meeting attended

Today I have attended the first meeting - held digitally - of the editorial board for the Norwegian philosophy and science festival "Wonderful world", which will be held for the second time, in Stavanger, May 30 - June 2nd.

#4

Today I have had half a writing day, bringing the Spring´s total up to 4, largely devoted to my chapter "Ecological semiotics" for the 3rd edition of Encyclopedia of Ecology, with some 600 words written. I also did a little bit on my book project Captured.

#3,5

Today I have had an article writing day devoted to the chapter for Encyclopedia of ecology "Ecological semiotics", with some 800 words written. Number of writing days so far this Spring is 3,5.

Abstract for ISQOLS 2024: "Can welfare and environmental concerns be measured in extension of GDP?"

I have just submitted the abstract below to the organizers of the 2024 conference of the International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS), which will be held in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, June 24-28th.

***

Can welfare and environmental concerns be measured in extension of GDP?  

Morten Tønnessen, Professor of Philosophy, Department of Social Sciences, University of Stavanger 

Jan Karlstrøm, Research assistant, Department of Social Sciences, University of Stavanger  

What the purpose of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is as a measure of economic activity has been debated ever since the term was launched and adopted in the 1930s. In this paper we go through the history of the concept of GDP, the criticism GDP has been met with, and proposed alternatives to GDP. Originally, GDP was constructed based on a need for more overview and a better basis for planned government management of the economy during the Depression and the Second World War. In the post-war period, GDP growth became a central political goal in and of itself. Even though from the very beginning it has been pointed out that GDP is not intended as a measure of welfare, GDP growth has constantly been associated with welfare development. Modern criticism of GDP as a measure of the state of the economy and social development has largely addressed the fact that GDP is poorly suited as a measure of welfare and that the target of GDP growth is unfortunate given the environmental consequences of increasing production and consumption. Several alternative measures of welfare development and environmental concerns have been launched, but none of them have succeeded in becoming as central as GDP. The new measure that has gained the most traction, namely the UN's Human Development Index, has incorporated GDP rather than replaced GDP. We look at alternatives for measuring welfare, alternatives that address environmental concerns, and alternatives that address both welfare and environmental concerns and evaluate these critically.

Abstract for 24th Gathering in biosemiotics: "Applied Umwelt theory in the context of descriptive phenomenology and phenomenological triangulation"

I have just submitted the abstract below to the organizers of the 24th Gathering in Biosemiotics, which will be held in Bloemfontein, South Africa, June 17-21st. 

***

Applied Umwelt theory in the context of descriptive phenomenology and phenomenological triangulation  

Author: Morten Tønnessen 

Affiliation: Professor of philosophy, Department of social studies, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway  

In earlier work, I have argued that a genuine ´Uexküllian phenomenology´ can be derived from the Umwelt theory of Jakob von Uexküll and that such a phenomenology is capable of accounting for the subjective experience of both humans and animals. With its foundation in contemporary biosemiotics, such a modern, empirically informed phenomenology is particularly relevant for the study of human-animal relations and interaction in societal and ecological settings. In a recent chapter (Tønnessen 2023) I have outlined a scientific method for conducting qualitative studies of human and animal lifeworlds by introducing a semiotically informed descriptive phenomenology. While descriptive phenomenology in its current forms is typically only applicable to the study of human lifeworlds (Giorgi 2009), a reiteration of descriptive phenomenology that draws on Umwelt theory can be designed to be non-anthropocentric and pluralistic. In this paper I elaborate on a more-than-human descriptive phenomenology and explain how it can be applied within the humanities and social sciences as well as in a natural science context. Furthermore, I will discuss how Umwelt theory can be made use of as part of a methodology of phenomenological triangulation, in which 1st, 2nd and 3rd person perspectives are combined in studies of one and the same study object. This methodology draws on ideas developed in cognitive semiotics by Jordan Zlatev, Göran Sonesson, and others (e.g. Zlatev 2012). Overall, this paper aims to contribute to integrating biosemiotics and phenomenology and demonstrating the relevance of Umwelt theory for phenomenology, and vice versa.  

REFERENCES 

Giorgi, Amedeo (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology. Duquesne University Press. 

Tønnessen, Morten (2023). Umwelt theory for practitioners: Semiotic guidelines for application in a more-than-human descriptive phenomenology. Pp. 303–314 in Open Semiotics (4 volumes, ed. Amir Biglari), volume 4: Life and its extensions. Paris: L’Harmattan. 

Zlatev, Jordan (2012). Cognitive Semiotics: An emerging field for the transdisciplinary study of meaning. The Public Journal of Semiotics IV(1) (2012): 2–24. 

***

See also:

#27,5; abstract for special issue of Sign Systems Studies on Umwelt theory

Application to Nansenfondet sent in hope of conference participation funding

I have just submitted an application to Nansenfondet for funding of conference participation in 2024, for the project "Miljø og velferd" (Environment and welfare). As a result of budget cuts, the University of Stavanger´s Department of social studies, where I work, will only fund maximum one conference participation per year from now on, whereas I have been used to attending about five conferences per year.

First ethics seminar

Today I gave the first ethics seminar in the BPS330 bachelor in psychology course "Lovgivning og etikk" (Law and ethics) at University of Stavanger´s Department of social studies.

#2,5

Today I have had an article writing day, #2,5 this Spring, with some 1.100 words written altogether, mostly on the letter to the editor "Understanding subjecthood and experience" (see previous post), and secondarily on the book chapter "Ecological semiotics".

Letter to the editor "Understanding subjecthood and experience" written and submitted to Biosemiotics

Today I have written and submitted a Letter to the editor - or Correspondence - to Biosemiotics, titled "Understanding subjecthood and experience", in response to Eva Jablonka and Simona Ginsburg´s article "Living and Experiencing: Response to Commentaries", which was recently published in Biosemiotics.

See also:

Jablonka and Ginsburg´s response to my commentary on their target article; with comments

Jablonka and Ginsburg´s response to my commentary on their target article; with comments

In the recently published article "Living and Experiencing: Response to Commentaries", published in Biosemiotics, Eva Jablonka and Simona Ginsburg respond to my commentary "The Evolutionary Origin(s) of the Umwelt", which was one out of several commentaries on their 2022 target article "Learning and the evolution of conscious agents". While they overall present another impressively comprehensive article on the character, diversity and range of life, I feel that some of my views are misrepresented in their comments.

Excerpts:

Olteanu too (2022) points to the resonance between our theory and the biosemiotic approach to learning and consciousness, while other biosemioticians [Campbell (2022), Hendlin (2023), Tønnesson (2022)] emphasize both the common ground and the need to incorporate terms such as Umwelt into our framework and to expand on the continuity between life and mind.

No problem here.

The assumption that there is no life without sentience is reflected in the biopsychic stance of some of our commentators, who regard all living beings, from bacteria to humans, as sentient. This biopsychic assumption is clearly stated by Reber et al. (2022) and by Meincke (2023), but a biopsychic stance is also implied in the commentaries of Hendlin (2023), Tønnessen (2022), and Riskin (2023).

I do not think this is accurate. I make no claim in my commentary that I think it is fair to characterize as adopting a biopsychic stance implying that all life is sentient. On the contrary, I distinguish clearly between sentient and non-sentient organisms, and thematize the emergence of sentience during the Cambrian explosion.

Maybe the a priori assumption that intrinsic value must be mentally experienced is related to a different understanding of the terms “subject” and “subjective experiencing”. Subjective experiencing, as Tønnessen (2022) defines it, is “the experiencing of the subject”. However, a “subject”, as we understand the term, does not necessarily have mental states. A subject does have closure (and hence also a necessary inwardness and individuality) and is an agent that interacts with object/s external to it, reacting differently to world-generated and self-generated identical stimuli. Such reafferent reactions, were, we suggested, the non-mental precursors of the mental sense of self, and such reactions may be thought of as constituting “subjecthood”. But such subjecthood is as yet not mental subjecthood. Olteanu (2022) may have interpreted our usage of the term “subjective” in biosemiotic terms (as belonging to a subject, as subjecthood) and not in the common sense of equating “subjective experiencing” with “mental experiencing”, implying private, mental states such as perceiving the taste of banana ice cream and feeling fear.

I agree that not all subjects have mental states, and that some subjecthood is mental whether other organisms´ subjecthood is non-mental. What I criticized in my commentary was Jablonka and Ginsburg´s conflation of subjective experience with consciousness in their target article. Specifically, I questioned "one of its basic premises, namely that it is justified to “use the terms consciousness and subjective experiencing as synonyms” (p. 2)".

As Tønnessen (2022) rightly points out, the origin of the Umwelt is very ancient. We believe, as we think he does, that the co-construction of organisms and their relevant environment is as ancient as life itself. We also agree with him that a “sense saturated” Umwelten emerged during the Cambrian (with UAL), but we do not understand the basis of his claim that a primitive, mental sense of self preceded the Umwelten of sentient, Cambrian animals, and that the notion of Umwelt presupposes sentience.

I make no claim in my commentary to the effect "that a primitive, mental sense of self preceded the Umwelten of sentient, Cambrian animals, and that the notion of Umwelt presupposes sentience." This is misrepresenting my views. I refer to nothing "mental" in my commentary, clearly distinguish between conscious and non-conscious organisms, with and without the capacity for sensation, and my portrayal of the emergence of "sense-saturated" Umwelten, on the background of non-sentient Umwelten, clearly opposes the views that Jablonka and Ginsburg attribute to me.

In my commentary, I write: 

"The origin of the Umwelt did not coincide with the origin of sentience or consciousness. Nor did subjecthood, or subjective experience, emerge during the Cambrian explosion, though more complex forms of subjective experience evolved at this time."

I find it hard to understand how this can be taken to imply that all life is sentient and conscious, as Jablonka and Ginsburg appear to think is my view. "Subjective experience", in my view, "is a graded phenomenon, and evolved gradually to more complex forms as organisms evolved from simple organisms to more complex organisms."

#1,5

Today I have had half a writing day with work done on my book project Captured. So far this Spring I have had 1,5 writing days.

"Biosemiotic Achievement Award for the Year 2022" published in issue of Biosemiotics; updated reference

The short communication "Biosemiotic Achievement Award for the Year 2022", which I co-wrote with Ludmila Lackova and Ahti-Veikko Juhani Pietarinen, has appeared in issue 3, 2023 of Biosemiotics, 16(3). 

Updated reference:

Ludmila Lackova, Ahti-Veikko Juhani Pietarinen & Morten Tønnessen (2023). Biosemiotic Achievement Award for the Year 2022. Biosemiotics 16(3): 373–379. Published online October 9th 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-023-09544-9 

20 explanations of grading given

Over the last few days I have taken part in giving explanations of grading to 20 students in Ex.phil. as part of the University of Stavanger´s bachelor in psychology.

Second ethics lecture

Today I gave the second ethics lecture in the bachelor in psychology course "Lovgivning og etikk" (Law and ethics), BPS330, at University of Stavanger´s Department of social studies. Topics included professional ethics and the relation between law, professions and ethics.

First ethics lecture given

Today I gave the first ethics lecture in the bachelor in psychology course "Lovgivning og etikk" (Law and ethics), BPS330, at University of Stavanger´s Department of social studies.

#1; progress plan for book project "Captured: CCS and the fight for the soul of the environmental movement"

Today I have had the first writing day this Spring, mostly devoted to making a writing plan for the entire Spring (see previous post). I have also made a draft progress plan for my book project Captured: CCS and the fight for the soul of the environmental movement, estimating some 75 writing days resulting in a finished manuscript in June 2025. This would realistically leave space for only 10 article/chapter writing days in Autumn 2024 as well as in Spring 2025. 

Prioritized writing plan for Spring 2024, including writing days devoted to book writing

Today I have finished my Prioritized writing plan for Spring 2024, with plans for 47,5 writing days. This is somewhat less than last year (Spring 2023). I have tried to account for likely or possible travels in late Spring, and plan to devote an estimated 8 writing days for the book format (specifically, devoted to work with my book project Captured: CCS and the fight for the soul of the environmental movement). This will mean that I have less time for article and chapter writing. If I am to finish that project over the course of the next one and a half year, I will have to devote even more of my writing time to this purpuse in the Autumn and next Spring.

The work year 2023 by work hours

I have just finished reviewing the work year 2023 in terms of work hours logged. The year stands out as the shortest work year in recorded history, with 2.518,5 work hours logged, which amounts to 48,3 hours per week in average (holidays not subtracted), or 149% of a normal work year. In comparison, my average work week in 2009-2022 was in the range of 50,8-62,0 hours per week.

Among other key developments, the share of my work time I spent on "research" was record-high, at 41,4%, as was "research" and "literature" (e.g. book projects) combined, at 55,3%. "Research" was what I spent most time on in 36 weeks, while I spent most time on "UIS" 14 weeks. Of book projects, I spent the most time on Utslippsfrie nye verden? in the 1st tertial, Regnskap in the 2nd tertial, and Captured in the 3rd tertial. 

See also:

The academic year 2023 in review

Google Scholar: 2023 second-best year; "Semiotic agency" book most cited in 2023

According to my Google Scholar profile my research has now attracted 1.023 citations (+13 since December 28th), including 154 in 2023 (+12 since December 28th), making 2023 my second-best year so far. My h-index remains 18 and my i10-index 36.

Our book Semiotic agency, written by Alexei Sharov and me, had 20 citations in 2023 and now ranks as #9 on the list of my most cited texts, while my 2009 article "Umwelt transitions: Uexküll and environmental change" had 19 citations in 2023 - more than any other year - and still tops the list. 

See also:

Google Scholar: 1.010 citations at end of 2023