CAN SEMIOTICS HELP US SOLVE THE ECOLOGICAL CRISIS?

The holistic vision proposed by Brandt, linking ecology to social structure, language, and signs through the processes of extraction and waste, offers a new perspective for reassessing and transforming our interaction with the environment. Art, as a mediator in this dynamic, becomes an essential tool for awareness and action, suggesting that artworks can act as catalysts for reflection and social change. By valuing art as a form of cultural resistance, he promotes an approach where creativity is not only an expression of beauty or emotion but also an active commitment to sustainability and ecological regeneration. This reinforces the role of the artist as a vital actor in the ecological movement, using signs and symbols to question established norms and promote foundational myths about our presence on Earth.

Study of the notions of the finite and infinite in our relationship with the environment

The author establishes the theoretical foundations of the semiotic function, emphasizing that every semiotician recognizes the difference between the signified and the referent—that is, between intrinsic meaning and the specific meaning that this sense invites us to actualize. He specifies that the semiotic function encompasses, under the same signifier, two contents: one purely imaginary, iconic, and mentally visual, and the other symbolic, based on an imperative rooted in belief (Brandt, 2018, p. 273). This highlights a semiotic ecology where immaterial meaning is deeply anchored in material signification. Ecology is presented as an essential framework for understanding the physical limits to the infinite expansion of human activities, particularly in the fields of communication and economy. Brandt develops the idea of a?human ecology?constituted by a continuous cycle of extraction, consumption, and restitution, where humans and nature interact. He draws a parallel between?biological cycles?and?socio-economic cycles, demonstrating how each stage of the life cycle is influenced by and, in turn, influences social and semiotic structures.

The extraction of resources, the consumption of goods, and their restitution to the environment are not merely biological or physical processes; they are also deeply embedded in systems of meaning. He highlights a critical consideration: We live in a material world structured as a spherical territory—the globe of our planet; while the space of our thoughts, cultures, and global civilization, supported by our semiotic systems, including money and language, seems infinite in extension, the space of our material life is subject to the constraints of finitude. Nature cannot indefinitely sustain our infinite aspirations for productive growth through infinite yield or an unshakeable response allowing for arbitrary treatment. Ignoring this asymmetry between the infinite nature of the economy of signs and the finite nature of ecological reality could lead to disastrous consequences (Brandt, 2018, p. 274).

The Origin of the Semiotic

This section explores how social structures manifest as semiotic strata, analysing the transition from simple subsistence to more complex forms of sociality, such as?urbanization and sacralization. These evolutions superpose layers of meaning that enrich the?semiotic function, structuring language and cultural representations. Each stratum—sustenance, constructed goods, and sacred objects—corresponds to distinct levels of semiotic reality (existential, imaginary, symbolic), influencing individual perceptions and behaviours. Let's examine the three strata of social and environmental life through the example of a regenerative neighborhood, illustrated by the original texts of Marcos (2024).

Stratum I: Sustenance (Existential Level)

This first stratum is linked to?basic needs and subsistence. It includes everything necessary for immediate physical survival, such as food and water. In a society, this stratum corresponds to the?foundation of the economic and social structure, where the?production and consumption of natural resources?are central. It forms an existential and narrative reality, where life and death are the primary stakes. In regenerative neighborhoods, this stratum is addressed through sustainable food production systems?and?resource management strategies, such as vertical farming and rainwater collection. At this level, practices and infrastructures support vital needs?sustainably, minimizing the ecological footprint while ensuring the viability of life cycles.

Stratum II: Constructed Goods (Imaginary, Narrative, and Argumentative Level)

The second stratum concerns?built goods, including infrastructures and housing. This is the level of?urbanization, where materials such as wood, stone, and metals are used to build and maintain complex social structures. This stratum is associated with?institutional and legal society, which regulates collective life through?laws, norms, and policies. It embodies an?imaginary, narrative, and argumentative reality, rich in projects, policies, and historical narratives. In regenerative neighborhoods, this stratum manifests through the?integration of sustainable technologies?and the?use of recycled materials?for constructing?energy-positive buildings?and managing waste through circular economy principles. These practices contribute to?new narratives?that reconnect humans to their environment, enriching urban space with?community interactions, shared governance, and sustainable mobility, fostering economic autonomy and the?exchange of knowledge.

Stratum III: Sacred Objects (Symbolic Level)

The third and final stratum consists of?sacred objects, including?symbolic elements?such as?money, religious artifacts, and other representations of power and sovereignty. This level?transcends ordinary laws and norms?through the?sacrality of its manifestations. It represents?sovereignty as the ultimate power, using?symbols to exert and justify authority. This stratum houses a?symbolic reality?where?absolute truths and higher values?reside,?mentally shaping individuals as a "second nature,"?as described by philosopher Hegel (Kervegan, 2014). In?regenerative neighborhoods, the integration between?interior and exterior spaces?creates a?symbolic space?that reflects a?new relationship with nature, transcending material needs to embrace?values of respect and environmental preservation. This coexistence between?nature and culture?enriches every architectural element, contributing to?a regenerative and sustainable narrative?that reinforces?cultural and ecological depth.

The interaction between these strata is manifested through economic and semiotic exchange, where money plays a pivotal role. The invention of money, associated with this third stratum, illustrates the transformation of physical materials into symbols of transcendent value, used across all levels of society. Under capitalism, these interactions become even more integrated and complex, with significant consequences for both ecology and the global economy, often leading to crises when ecological limits are ignored or exceeded. These semiotic strata reflect a deeply embedded social structure that influences not only the economy but also individual and collective psychology, shaping interactions between individuals and the broader social system.

Ecological Avatars and Crisis

A?social crisis?occurs when at least one of these?strata ceases to function:

·?????? If the?organic cycle?is disrupted, it results in?famine or epidemics.

·?????? If?institutional life breaks down?due to?corruption, destruction of jurisdictional systems, terrorism, civil unrest, or stagnation of production, the crisis can?dissolve the imaginary coherence and dismantle society entirely.

·?????? The?symbolic crisis, on the other hand, is triggered by?inter-societal, inter-religious, or intercultural conflicts—often colonial, where one society?takes over another that lacks the technological capacity to resist and loses its sovereignty.

Modern crises take all these forms. Capitalist crises caused by financial speculation are symbolic and always concern sovereignty, affecting the meta-political layer that holds absolute monetary power. Speculative capital, in the hands of this layer, ceases to sustain production and reinvests infinitely at its own level, as the extraction of energy, labor, and materials becomes inhibited—perhaps permanently blocked this time—due to resource depletion and the constant threats of natural disasters, largely caused by human lifestyles and exploitation. In this situation, the crisis of sovereignty (III) more or less directly turns into an institutional crisis (II) and an organic crisis (I): the reckless self-sufficiency of rulers, collective confusion, and growing misery. The symbolic and organic strata tend to merge without the intervention of the intermediate stratum; the powerful in delirium and the struggling masses unite—for the worse.

To conclude

Brandt considers ecological and social crises as symptoms of dysfunctions within these interactive strata. He highlights the role of art as an aesthetic practice capable of questioning and redefining social signs that have been consumed and altered by crises. Art, through its finite and structured nature, offers a counterpoint to the infinite semiotics of growth, encouraging reflection on ecological limits and the possibility of an ethical renewal based on the recognition of these constraints. He suggests that art can transcend traditional semiotic practices by creating works that directly reflect the tensions between humanity’s infinite aspirations for growth and the finite limits of the planet. By engaging critically and aesthetically with these tensions, art can help raise awareness and catalyze ethical change in how societies perceive and interact with their environment. Due to its expressive and often provocative nature, art is uniquely positioned to symbolically represent the contradictions between the economy of signs and the ecology of things, highlighting the consequences of human actions and economic systems on the environment. By visually or conceptually illustrating ecological impacts and engaging the public in these discussions, art can foster reflection on ecological behaviors and stimulate an essential dialogue on sustainability. For Brandt, art is not only a form of cultural resistance but also a potential tool to rebalance humanity’s relationship with nature, offering perspectives that can inspire responsible and sustainable actions to address the global ecological crisis.

Bibliography

Baudrillard, J. (1972).?Pour une critique de l'économie politique du signe. Paris: Gallimard.

Brandt, P. A. (2018).?écologie et sémiotique. In A. Biglari (Ed.),?La sémiotique en interface?(pp. 273-286). Paris: Kimé, Collection Sémiotique.

Hoffmeyer, J. (1996).?Signs of Meaning in the Universe. Indiana University Press.

Kervegan, J.-F. (2014).?Nature, seconde nature, société: le concept hégélien de Sittlichkeit. Retrieved from Academia.edu.

Kull, K. (1998).?Semiotic ecology: Different natures in the semiosphere.?Sign Systems Studies, 26, 344–371.

Lawson, T. (2016).?Social Positioning and the Nature of Money.?Cambridge Journal of Economics, 40, 961–996.

Marcos, I. (2024).?Deciphering the Spaces of Ecology. Paper presented at the?16th World Congress, Warsaw.

Martin, L.-é. (2016).?écrire, Lire, Traduire. Blog. ISSN 2551-7309.

Sebeok, T. A. (1990).?Essays in Zoosemiotics. Toronto: Toronto Semiotic Circle.

?

Subscribe to our newsletter: significant.design/association-newsletter-eg ???

?

#SemioticEcology #PerAageBrandt #EnvironmentalSemiotics #EcologicalEthics #EcologicalCrisis #ArtAndEcology #InfiniteGrowth #SustainabilityScience #SignsAndSymbols #HumanInteractions