[Index] [Prev] [Next]

Comments to Semios-L

John Dickison :
Re: God/Sign;
Fri, 14 Jun 1996 13:40:10 +0800

I reckon to clear up this discussion, you're looking for a sign from God.
nyerk, nyerk nyerk.  "Moses, take two tablets and call me in the morning,"
signed, God.

"Name the unknowable, say the unspeakable, do the unthinkable, define the
universe, and give two examples.  After that, a uniform semiotic taxonomy will
be a pierce of cake with creme sauss." --john dickison
_______________________________________________________________________________
From: Visual and Verbal Semiotics on Wed, Jun 12, 1996 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: TUT: SIGN
To: Multiple recipients of list SEMIOS-L

>First, the 'something other than itself' need also to be something physical
>(perceivable to our senses, as Fiske names it). If one does not accept this,
>I think we could end up with a deconstructionist idea of the sign in which
>sings get their meaning by referring to other signs, which in their turn
>refer to other signs. At the end we need to arrive at the physical reality,
>if not we end up in a sort of idealism.

I wonder about this, and perhaps it is merely a manifestation of my
ignorance, but:

What then of the word "God"?  Is this not a sign, because God is not
perceivable by our senses?  What of, as well, "love," "hate," and other
emotions?

Have a good day!
Dr. Dave Reinheimer
University of California, Davis
dareinheimer@ucdavis.edu

[Index] [Prev] [Next]

Comments to Semios-L