Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Farouk Y.  Seif
  • 204 Raven Lane, Olga, WA 98279, USA
  • (360) 376-4747 (office)
While edusemiotics emerges as a fresh field of inquiry in the core of semiotic enterprise, the relationship between factual information and imaginative interpretation remains problematic and dualistic. This article proposes a theoretical... more
While edusemiotics emerges as a fresh field of inquiry in the core of semiotic enterprise, the relationship between factual information and imaginative interpretation remains problematic and dualistic. This article proposes a theoretical framework that utilizes design inquiry for advancing edusemiotics. In a Transmodern world, human beings are able to cross over diaphanous boundaries among the real, the true, and the imaginary, transforming what has been in existence by making new representations of that which is yet-to-come. Augmenting edusemiotics with design thinking transcends our assumptions about the ephemeral phenomena of reality and reveals the hidden connection between factual information and imaginative interpretation. Introducing design inquiry into edusemiotics not only encourages scholars to bridge the gap between theoretical investigations and practical applications but, more significantly , also turns their attention to the development of their capacity to becoming andragogical agents of change. Since its birth in 2010 (Semetsky 2010), the idea of edusemiotics seems to face the challenge of conventional perception and limited understanding of learning theory and education. This is not surprising; semiotics remains not widely accepted as the perfect tool for understanding teaching and learning (Nöth 2010). Despite the fact that Thomas A. Sebeok (2001) rejected the cleavage between arts and sciences, the challenge still has to do with the predicament of whether semiotics resides within the realm of humanities or the realm of
Research Interests:
Space and time in human experience are merely ordering systems upon which all of the social activities and objects in the world can be perceived as real, where continu- ity and discontinuity appear as dualism. Animating and leading... more
Space and time in human experience are merely ordering systems upon which all of the social activities and objects in the world can be perceived as real, where continu- ity and discontinuity appear as dualism. Animating and leading meaningful change while simultaneously maintaining the resilience of continuity can be accomplished by reframing the perception of reality: space and time. Contemporary societies can persevere through the metamorphoses of reality by navigating through diaphanous space and polychronic time. To engage in this navigation is to be willing to experi- ence the transparency and integration of the chrysalis process. Our capacity to nav- igate through diaphanous space and polychronic time liberates us from the limita- tions of the present, dogmatic ideologies, and uncertainties of exploring unfamiliar boundaries.
Research Interests:
What we perceive is not reality itself but reality exposed to our way of perceiving. By relying on the autonomous separation between humanities and science, we seem to have developed a tendency to experience reality in ways that enable us... more
What we perceive is not reality itself but reality exposed to our way of perceiving. By relying on the autonomous separation between humanities and science, we seem to have developed a tendency to experience reality in ways that enable us to perceive more of what we value. More than the traditional disciplines of the two dominant cultures of humanities and science, design transcends our assumptions about reality and reveals the hidden connection between factual information and imaginative interpretation. Reality in a transmodern world is a hyperreality, where human beings are able to transform what has been in existence by design. The mutual interrelation between design and semiotics provides the opportunity not only to cross the perceived boundaries among the real, the true, and the imaginary, but also to overcome the humanities-science schism.
Research Interests:
We perceive the world in a three-dimensional space modulated by the passage of time. In human experience, spatiality and temporality are merely ordering systems through which all objects and activities in the world can be perceived as... more
We perceive the world in a three-dimensional space modulated by the passage of time. In human experience, spatiality and temporality are merely ordering systems through which all objects and activities in the world can be perceived as “real.” The literal-minded perception of space and time has triggered absolute sociocultural and cognitive values, which in turn have led to a limiting way of life. While space and time are elements of a semiotic systemic framework that lets humans make sense of their experiences, they are not the ultimate truth. Like all semiotic signs, the words “space” and “time” are open to multiple interpretations. Although human perception of space and time is an illusion, illusion is not necessarily the opposite of truth or reality. Contemporary society would benefit greatly from an age-old tradition of navigation through “diaphanous space and polychronic time”—where diaphanous space is materialized through the image of the human body and the universe transparently interconnected; and where the concept of polychronic time provides a reversible circular dimension of cultural practice that was bound to the cycle of seasons in an infinite process. Learning to navigate through diaphanous space and polychronic time bridges different civilizations and stimulates cultural sensitivity and environmental sensibility.
Research Interests:
Although paradoxes are embedded into our perception of reality, there seems to be a limited understanding of the nature of their antinomies and how we deal with them. There is a tendency to experience reality in ways that enable us to... more
Although paradoxes are embedded into our perception of reality, there seems to be a limited understanding of the nature of their antinomies and how we deal with them. There is a tendency to experience reality in ways that enable us to perceive more of what we value. For what we perceive is not reality itself but reality as exposed to our way of perceiving. Habitually, paradoxes are perceived as a problematic dualism that must be fixed to favor one pole in a tensional pair over the other. We can only persevere through paradoxes as intertwined phenomenological polarities. This can be accomplished by reframing our conventional perceptions of antinomies of the real, the true, and the imaginary. Living with this tensional relationship inherent in all paradoxes can be rewarding for our semioethical responsibilities toward other-than-human systems. To engage in design, one must develop the capacity for perseverance in order to thrive despite all odds in challenging situations.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Abstract: This dialogue between two “semiotic animals” explores the paradox of life and death where death is not perceived as an absolute end or an inevitable aspect of life. The reciprocal and paradoxical relationship between life and... more
Abstract: This dialogue between two “semiotic animals” explores the paradox of life and death where death is not perceived as an absolute end or an inevitable aspect of life. The reciprocal and paradoxical relationship between life and death is at the core of the semiotic process. Death is an integral part of this semiotic process, like a door opening out on another transcending world with unpredictable outcomes. Not only does the dialogue reveal an insight into the semioethics of the ritualization of life and death but it also exposes the disingenuous separation between the realms of zoosemiotics and anthroposemiotics. On ontological and epistemological levels, both zoosemiotics and anthroposemiotics are integrated reality that invariably cannot exist without one or the other in mutually transparent co-evolutionary processes purpose- fully oriented toward meaning making.
Cultures stand at a critical junction in history. Modern society confronts the burden of gifts and curses of digital technology where the lines between real relations and virtual relations become blurred, and interconnections between... more
Cultures stand at a critical junction in history. Modern society confronts the burden of gifts and curses of digital technology where the lines between real relations and virtual relations become blurred, and interconnections between cultural objects and their respective signs become trivialized. Digital technology affects our entire cultural practices exemplified in global exchanges of information, freedom of expression, and the unprecedented sphere of choices. Although digitization is an advantageous technological achievement of speed and accuracy, it impoverishes the role of the analog mode in experiencing the undifferentiated cultural reality. The real world seems to be replaced by images that make themselves the epitome of reality, where technology is viewed as a factitious god, making its own rules and aims at nothing but itself. The mass rush to digitization comes with an imaginative result but with a high price. Although the nature of life favors optimization over maximization, effectiveness rather than efficiency, digitization continues to be our path to efficient maximization. And because of our convenient habits, it is impossible for our technologically advanced society to resurrect the good-old days.

The debate among proponents and opponents of digital technology and its roles in the transformation of culture seems to lead to confusion and frustration. Several questions are raised to organize this debate and to seek more sensibility and understanding: In what way does digital age endanger cultural reality? How can the information age help to preserve the identity of cultures in our ever-changing and homogenizing digital world? How do we capitalize on the power of virtual reality to maintain cultural memory? What fundamentally different ways of thinking and interacting with digital information enable us to transform and sustain cultures? What roles do digital communication play in moving beyond the pseudo-social life to authentic cultural practices?

This paper introduces a different theoretical framework by juxtaposing the competing yet mutually reinforcing role of technology and the idea of teleology. The theoretical framework draws from philosophy (e.g. Jean Baudrillard, Jean Gebser), semiotics (e.g. Charles S. Peirce, Yuri M. Lotman) and contemporary systems thinking (e.g. Ervin Laszlo, Humberto Maturana); and substantiated by historical events and traditional cultural practices. Based on this framework, and by reframing the challenge at hand, the paper calls for a design approach, engaging producers and users in a co-creating process that seeks a purposeful integration of humans and machines, and leads to new forms of cultural semiosphere.

A conclusion is reached calling for an eco-humanistic understanding to cultural transformation, and suggests that: 1) digital technology is best viewed as a means to an end, where the means and the end reciprocate purposefully in an integrative circularity; and 2) persevering and feeling comfortable with the paradoxical and tensional relationship between techne and teleos can bring forward a sustainable and desirable future that transcend virtual reality into an authentic and enhanced cultural reality. This is what our digital age needs for cultural transformation.
Abstract. Since the beginning of history humans have attempted to represent nature and culture through mimesis. This article focuses on the teleological aspects of mimesis and offers a different perspective that transcends the notion of... more
Abstract. Since the beginning of history humans have attempted to represent nature and culture through mimesis. This article focuses on the teleological aspects of mimesis and offers a different perspective that transcends the notion of sustainability into an eco-humanistic metamorphosis of culture and nature. Drawing from semiotics, phenomenology and architectural design the article challenges the polarization of mimetic representations of nature and culture, which are inclusive and homomorphic phenomena, and offers insight into the mutual mimesis of nature and culture. Two different empirical observations substantiate the theoretical perspective: 1) a tradition advanced by the Egyptians’ stylization of visual representations of the mimicry of nature and culture; and 2) a current architectural design activity that integrates the mimesis of nature and culture. The article makes the case for a theoretical approach that integrates mimetic principles in creating a sustainable environment and an authentic eco- living. The article concludes with ethical implications on the way we perceive the mutual resemblances in nature and culture, and on our semiotic understanding of the teleological aspects of mimesis.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: