“Zoosemiotics beyond Sebeok” presented at 22nd Gathering in Biosemiotics in the Czech Republic

Today I have presented my paper “Zoosemiotics beyond Sebeok” in the first session of the 22nd International Gathering in Biosemiotics, which is held at Palacký University in Olomouc, the Czech Republic, June 27th - July 1st. Perhaps 60 people attended the talk. In addition, a dozen people or so followed the conference livestream on YouTube.

By now todays´ livestream has been seen by some 200 people.

Scheduled for oral presentations 27th and 28th of June at 22nd Gathering in biosemiotics in Olomouc

I have been scheduled to present my paper "Zoosemiotics beyond Sebeok" at the 22nd gathering in Biosemiotics (Olomouc, Czech Republic June 27-July 1st) on Monday June 27th at 10.40-11.00, at Palacky university.

Conference program and further info is available here. See also abstract book and the conference YouTube channel.

I am also co-author of Alexei Sharov´s presentation "Towards a theory of semiotic agency" (see pp. 111-112 in the abstract book), based on our book Semiotic agency: Science beyond mechanism, which will be held Tuesday June 28th at 11.00-11.20.

Paper "Zoosemiotics beyond Sebeok" accepted for presentation at 22nd gathering of biosemiotics

I have been notified by the conference organizers that my abstract "Zoosemiotics beyond Sebeok" has been accepted for oral presentation at the 22nd gathering in biosemiotics, which will be held in Olomouc, the Czech Republic, June 27th to July 1st.

CFP for 22nd International Gathering in Biosemiotics announced

The call for papers for the 22nd International Gathering in Biosemiotics, to be held at Palacký University in Olomouc, the Czech Republic June 27th - July 1st 2022, has been made. Abstracts are due February 28th 2022.

Adjusted conference dates for 20th Gathering in biosemiotics

The 20th gathering in biosemiotics, held digitally, will take place over the days Friday November 27th to Sunday November 29th. The originally planned conference dates were November 24th to 28th. I will speak. The conference is organized by Palacký University in the Czech Republic.

20th gathering in biosemiotics: Paper accepted; abstract to appear in book

I have been notified that my paper "Introducing a three-dimensional interactive model of environmental change" has been accepted to oral presentation at the 20th gathering in biosemiotics (which is being postponed until November, cf. previous post). The notification also included information about a book that will appear in relation to the gathering (published by University of Tartu Press), where the abstract of my paper will be included.

20th gathering in biosemiotics postponed

Yesterday it was announced that the 20th gathering in biosemiotics, which was to be held in Olomouc, Czech republic, July 8-12th, has been postponed until November. No specific dates have been announced as of yet.

Abstract review for 20th gathering in biosemiotics done

I have recently reviewed ca. 17 abstracts as a member of the scientific committee for the 20th gathering in biosemiotics, to be held (hopefully) in Olomouc in July.

Abstract for 20th gathering in Biosemiotics (Olomouc): "Introducing a Three-Dimensional Interactive Semiotic Model of Environmental Change"

I have just submitted my paper abstract for the 20th gathering in biosemiotics, to be held in Olomouc, the Czech Republic, this July.

**

"Introducing a Three-Dimensional Interactive Semiotic Model of Environmental Change"

In this paper I present a three-dimensional interactive semiotic model of environmental change which incorporates some elements from my previous work and introduces new, related elements. The paper draws directly on work from my recently published article “What can be known about future Umwelten?” (Tønnessen 2019).  

This model is interactive because it demonstrates the constant interplay between different forms of causation and signals. It is three-dimensional because it takes three dimensions of living nature into consideration (see Table 1 below; taken from Tønnessen 2019: 419), namely the Innenwelt, the Umwelt and the Umgebung of a creature endowed with an Umwelt (typically an animal, a human being or a microorganism) (von Uexküll 1921). By applying a subjective perspective focused on the inner world (Innenwelt) and outer world (Umwelt) of animals and humans, and the subjective worlds´ relation to relevant aspects of the physical environment (Umgebung), the model builds directly on von Uexküll´s Umwelt theory.

The organism relates to its physical environment in two fundamentally different ways, namely by way of signification and by way of efficient causation, and it is thus involved in both semiotic and physio-chemical processes, with the former being endosemiotic in the Innenwelt and exosemiotic in the Umwelt.

The complex interplay between the three dimensions of living nature is illustrated in Figure 3 below (taken from Tønnessen 2019: 420). The interplay between the various dimensions involve environmental signals (originating from the Umgebung) which triggers Umwelt signals (originating from the Umwelt) which triggers Innenwelt signals (originating from the Innenwelt) which in turn triggers action and thus semiotic causation, or in other words “the bringing about of changes [in the Umgebung] under the guidance of interpretation” (Hoffmeyer 2008: 149).     

The change from one interplay cycle to another can be understood as an Umwelt transition, and seen in context, several Umwelt transitions can be understood as constituting an Umwelt trajectory. Change from one interplay cycle to another also constitutes an Innenwelt transition, and seen in context, several Innenwelt transitions constitute an Innenwelt trajectory: i.e., the course through time taken by the Innenwelt of a creature as defined by its changing relation to itself and its own body.

As we see in this complex, dynamic model of environmental change, changes in, e.g., identity, experience, and the physical environment are interrelated, and change in one dimension can be triggered by changes in the other two dimensions. While the physical environment is constantly affected by living creatures (via semiotic causation), it also changes irrespective of the actions of Umwelt creatures—via efficient causation. This in turn affects environmental signals that again, in ever new cycles, trigger new Umwelt signals, which trigger new Innenwelt signals, which trigger new actions and thus new forms of semiotic causation, and so on.   

References 

Hoffmeyer, Jesper 2008. Semiotic Scaffolding of living systems. In Marcello Barbieri (ed.), Introduction to Biosemiotics: The New Biological Synthesis (Dordrecht: Springer), 149–166.  

Tønnessen, Morten 2019. What can be known about future Umwelten? The American Journal of Semiotics 35(3-4): 401–429. DOI: 10.5840/ajs202012359 

von Uexküll, Jakob 1921. Umwelt und Innenwelt der Tiere (2nd edition). Berlin: Verlag von Julius Springer.

20th gathering in biosemiotics to be held at Palacký university July 8-12th 2020

The call for papers for the 20th gathering in biosemiotics, to be held at Palacký university in Olomouc, Czech Republic July 8-12th 2020, has been released, see conference webpage. Abstract deadline is February 28th.

Annual editorial meeting of Biosemiotics held

Today, at the 16th gathering of biosemiotics, at Charles University in Prague, I took part in the annual editorial meeting of Biosemiotics, which I co-edit with Alexei Sharov and Timo Maran. Some 30-35 people were present.

"Socialization of captive wolves" paper accepted for GiB16 (Prague)

I have been informed that the Program Committee of the Sixteenth Annual Gatherings in Biosemiotics (Prague, 4 – 8 July) has accepted our paper "Socialization of captive wolves" (joint paper with Laura Kiiroja) for oral presentation.

"A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep" accepted for GiB16 (Prague)

I have just been informed that the Program Committee of the Sixteenth Annual Gatherings in Biosemiotics (Prague, 4 – 8 July) has accepted my paper "A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep" for oral presentation.

Paper abstract with Laura Kiiroja for GiB16: "Socialization of captive wolves"

For the 16th Annual Gathering in Biosemiotics (Prague, 4-8 July 2016), Laura Kiiroja and I submitted the abstract below.

***

Socialization of captive wolves

Laura Kiiroja & Morten Tønnessen  

Wolves give rise to controversy not only in the wild but also in captivity. Due to their genetically inherited fear of humans, wolves in captivity are notorious for persistent escape attempts, self-destructive behaviours, stereotypical behaviour and over-all suffering. Socialization of wolves with humans makes the animals more suitable for living in captive environments by reducing their fear of humans. Although proven effective, it is still a widely unknown and often misunderstood method of improving animal welfare for captive wolves. 

In this paper, a semiotic approach is used to explain the essence and proper methodology of socialization of wolves with humans for animal welfare purposes. Emphasis is put on understanding the changes in the animal’s Umwelt and in the human–animal relationship. The interdisciplinary theoretical contribution will be supported by Laura Kiiroja’s practical experiences with socialization of wolves in USA and Germany, and by Morten Tønnessen’s studies of wolf socialization in two Norwegian zoos (Langedrag mountain farm and wildlife park and Polar Zoo). Additionally, Kiiroja has conducted semi-structured interviews with world-recognized experts.  

The study explains how proper socialization aims to change the human’s significance in the animal’s Umwelt from enemy to social partner. This requires social human-imprinting, and using consistently positive methods of taming and handling. In fact, using aversive techniques, such as dominance theory and punishment, damages socialization and results in dangerous situations. Working “on animal terms” and establishing effective inter-specific communication is crucial for avoiding conflicts and maintaining positive and healthy relationships. The authors suggest that a zoosemiotic approach complements more mainstream ethological knowledge in human–animal interactions and is capable of advancing animal welfare as well as give zoo visitors more realistic experiences of wolves. 

The pros and cons of socializing captive wolves will be analysed. Animal welfare will improve with more opportunities for enrichment, less stressful effect of visitors, and better veterinary routines and husbandry practices. Avoiding suffering caused by constant fear enables the animal to display a quite complete species-specific behavioural repertoire. This is a benefit for behavioural research on captive wolves. Additionally, seeing the wolves in close proximity or interacting with them triggers empathy and interest in visitors, and this may contribute positively to support for wolf conservation. On the downside, zoos and other facilities keeping socialized wolves should be aware of the possibility that visitors might misinterpret wolves as potential pets, and adjust their education program accordingly. The management of these facilities should furthermore invest in educated wolf personnel, to be able to meet the requirements of proper wolf socialization. 

Keywords: Umwelt theory, wolves, captivity, socialization, human–animal relationships, human–animal communication, animal welfare, animal behaviour

Abstract for Gathering in Biosemiotics 16: "A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep"

Today I have submitted the abstract below to the organizers of Gathering in Biosemiotics 16 (Prague July 4-8).

***

A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep

Morten Tønnessen

University of Stavanger, Norway

Wolves and sheep go together – at least in the public mind. In terms of ecological range, they are among the most widespread mammals of wild and domesticated species respectively. While the wolf is in several countries the most controversial large carnivore, it is also, and not coincidentally, the most symbolically laden Western carnivore. The wolf is a symbol of large carnivores, governmental interference in local issues, freedom and authenticity, evil, hunger, sexuality, etc. Sheep, on the other hand, represent among other things innocence and vulnerability (and, of course – food, wool and thus economic value). 

The juxtaposition of the symbolism of wolves and sheep go all the way back to the Bible, if not even further. In the Bible, this archetypical opposition is only resolved in the vision of a new Earth and new Heavens, when, in this new paradise, “[t]he wolf and the lamb will feed together” (Isaiah 65:25). Meanwhile, everybody “knows” that wolves prey on sheep. However, many would be surprised to learn that in Norway, wolves over time only account for 4–5% of depredation on sheep (Rovdata). This demonstrates the way in which people are informed not only by facts, but also by cultural imagery.

Familiarity with the cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is arguably a precondition for fully understanding the fierce human emotions that are invoked in social and political conflicts on wolf management and conservation. Although there are local variations, and even though imagery and symbolism can change over time, the “background noise”, as it were, of the historical cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep is significant practically wherever there are, or were, wolves.

In this paper I will present central and illustrative examples of the symbolism of wolves and sheep from a historical point of view. The historical perspective will help making sense of developments in animal imagery. The topic matter is of interest not only because it says something about how we conceive of animals, but also because our representations of wolves and sheep are often used to construct human identities. As a matter of fact, the cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is just as telling about who we are, as humans, and how we think about ourselves, as it is about actual wolves and sheep.

Acknowledgement: This work has been carried out thanks to the support of the research project Animals in Changing Environments: Cultural Mediation and Semiotic Analysis (EEA Norway Grants/Norway Financial Mechanism 2009–2014 under project contract no. EMP151).

Reference

Rovdata. http://www.rovdata.no. 

16th Gathering in Biosemiotics to be held in Prague

At the General Assembly of the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies a few days ago (see separate post), it was disclosed, suggested and decided that the 16th Gathering in Biosemiotics will take place in Prague, the Czech Republic, next summer - convened by Karel Kleisner. It has furthermore been indicated that the 17th gathering might be held in Lausanne, Switzerland (though a decision will only be made next summer).

Review conducted for Czech Science Foundation

A while ago I conducted a peer-review for Czech Science Foundation.

No from Czech-Norwegian grant scheme

The Czech-Norwegian grant application I have taken part in (see previous posts) along with Anton Markoš and Dan Faltýnek, entitled "Living beings as sign systems in evolution and development", was not successful. This became clear as results were announced July 15th. 19 of around 400 applications were funded.

400 applied for Norwegian-Czech funding

According to the Research Council of Norway (the news story "Over 800 vil forske med Tsjekkia og Romania" [More than 800 want to do research with the Czech Republic and Romania], about 400 applications were submitted to the recent call in relation to the EEA-affiliated Norwegian-Czech research program. Among these is "Living beings as sign systems in evolution and development", which will prospectively be lead by Anton Markoš (Charles University, Prague) and have me in the role as Norwegian project leader (University of Stavanger).

I assume some 20-30 projects (i.e., 5-7,5 %) will be funded.

See also:

Czech-Norwegian research application composed and submitted (February 3)

Two reviews conducted for Czech Science Foundation

The last year I've conducted two peer-reviews (of project proposals aiming at getting research funding) for the Czech Science Foundation, in Czech called Grantová agentura České republiky (GAČR). Given that the peer-review is anonymous I cannot provide much detail.