Face in the mirror, what do you see? Catoptric autoexperimentation and the physiognomic gaze

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Chinese Semiotic Studies Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.1515/css-2023-2017
Devon Schiller
{"title":"Face in the mirror, what do you see? Catoptric autoexperimentation and the physiognomic gaze","authors":"Devon Schiller","doi":"10.1515/css-2023-2017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract To critically explicate the visual epistemology for catoptric autoexperimentation in the contemporary science of facial behavior, by way of its historical progenitors, I draw upon the pragmatic semiotics of the catoptric phenomenon. This problematization of catoptrics is fundamentally about two different but related concepts: the semiotic threshold and the iconicity debate. Based on primary sources both Western and Eastern, I trace a transcultural history of scientific ideas about performing catoptric auto-experimentation through privileged case studies from physiognomic literary corpora. I probe the ways in which self-recognition has long been pragmatically necessitated as well as processually normative in the study of the face, the research and development of optical technologies has in turn led to paradigm shifts in physiognomic thought, and the procatoptric staging behind the catoptric prosthesis conditions its visual epistemology. I propose that the catoptric prosthesis is not pre- but post-semiotic. That is, the mirror only becomes a mirror when part of a semiotic process and sign relation. The extreme of iconicity that is perceptually afforded by the catoptric prosthesis, far from disqualifying it from the status of a sign, is exactly what distinguishes its role and importance for this semiosis of the face.","PeriodicalId":52036,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Semiotic Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Semiotic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/css-2023-2017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract To critically explicate the visual epistemology for catoptric autoexperimentation in the contemporary science of facial behavior, by way of its historical progenitors, I draw upon the pragmatic semiotics of the catoptric phenomenon. This problematization of catoptrics is fundamentally about two different but related concepts: the semiotic threshold and the iconicity debate. Based on primary sources both Western and Eastern, I trace a transcultural history of scientific ideas about performing catoptric auto-experimentation through privileged case studies from physiognomic literary corpora. I probe the ways in which self-recognition has long been pragmatically necessitated as well as processually normative in the study of the face, the research and development of optical technologies has in turn led to paradigm shifts in physiognomic thought, and the procatoptric staging behind the catoptric prosthesis conditions its visual epistemology. I propose that the catoptric prosthesis is not pre- but post-semiotic. That is, the mirror only becomes a mirror when part of a semiotic process and sign relation. The extreme of iconicity that is perceptually afforded by the catoptric prosthesis, far from disqualifying it from the status of a sign, is exactly what distinguishes its role and importance for this semiosis of the face.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
镜子里的脸,你看到了什么?反射性自我实验和面相凝视
为了批判性地解释当代面部行为科学中反射性自动实验的视觉认识论,通过其历史祖先,我借鉴了反射现象的实用符号学。这种对反射性的问题化基本上是关于两个不同但相关的概念:符号学阈值和象似性辩论。基于西方和东方的原始资料,我通过面相学文学语料库的特殊案例研究,追溯了关于进行反射性自动实验的科学思想的跨文化历史。我探讨了在面部研究中,自我认知长期以来在实用上是必要的,在过程上是规范的,光学技术的研究和发展反过来导致了面相学思想的范式转变,以及反射性假肢背后的反射性阶段决定了其视觉认识论。我认为反射假体不是前符号学而是后符号学。也就是说,镜子只有在成为符号学过程和符号关系的一部分时才成为镜子。由反射假体提供的感知上的极端象似性,远非使其失去符号的地位,正是区分其在面部符号学中的作用和重要性的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Chinese Semiotic Studies
Chinese Semiotic Studies HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
期刊最新文献
The role of the normative sciences in the evolution of Peirce’s pragmatism Football statues and semiotics The relation of Peirce’s abduction to inference to the best explanation Peirce’s philosophy of language Pragmatism, logic, and manuscript R318
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1