Abstract
Charles S. Peirce’s semiotics uniquely divides signs into: (i) symbols, which pick out their objects by arbitrary convention or habit , (ii) indices, which pick out their objects by unmediated ‘pointing’, and (iii) icons, which pick out their objects by resembling them (as Peirce put it: an icon’s parts are related in the same way that the objects represented by those parts are themselves related). Thus representing structure is one of the icon’s greatest strengths. It is argued that the implications of scaffolding education iconically are profound: for providing learners with a navigable road-map of a subject matter, for enabling them to see further connections of their own in what is taught, and for supporting meaningful active learning. Potential objections that iconic teaching is excessively entertaining and overly susceptible to misleading rhetorical manipulation are addressed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In the same volume Peirce’s former student Christine Ladd-Franklin also wrote a testimonial which was more critical, noting an “apparent aloofness and air of irresponsibility”, but adding that in the classroom, “[h]e got his effect…by creating the impression that we had before us a profound, original, dispassionate and impassioned seeker of truth” (Ladd-Franklin 1916, pp. 716–717).
- 2.
Of course this is an emotionally charged example and one might wonder what are the limits of this model of interpretation? Could it be applied for instance to mathematics? Yes, even here Peirce claims that all three stages of interpretation are operative and vital. Hence the widely-acknowledged role of aesthetic appreciation (emotional interpretation) at the highest levels of mathematics, driven by an eros (energetic interpretation) not toward deductively valid arguments, which are a dime a dozen in the field, but so-called ‘elegant solutions’.
- 3.
Yet again a reference to Plato’s philosophy is irresistible at this point—namely the claim towards the end of the Meno that what differentiates knowledge from mere belief is that it is ‘tethered’ so that it cannot ‘run off’. Indeed, perhaps Plato’s eidos or Form, with its strong (yet today strangely unremarked) visual connotations might have been precisely a semiotic concept reaching towards Peirce’s icon—rather than a useless entity sitting ‘in Heaven’ inviting Ockhamist elimination.
References
Brent, J. (1998). Charles Sanders Peirce: A life. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Carnap, R. (2002). The logical syntax of language (A. Smeaton, Trans.). Chicago: Open Court Press.
Colapietro, V. (2013). Neglected facets of Peirce’s ‘Speculative’ rhetoric’. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45(7), 712–736.
Dretske, F. (1981). Knowledge and the flow of information. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hoopes, J. (1998). Community denied: The wrong turn of pragmatic liberalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Houser, N. (1986). Introduction. In The writings of Charles S. Peirce (Vol. 4: 1879–1884, pp. xix–lxx). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Houser, N. (1987). Toward a Peircean semiotic theory of learning. The American Journal of Semiotics, 5(2), 251–274.
Jappy, T. (2013). Introduction to Peircean visual semiotics. London: Bloomsbury.
Jastrow, J. (1916). Charles S. Peirce as a teacher. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 13(26), 723–726.
Ladd-Franklin, C. (1916). Charles S. Peirce at the Johns Hopkins. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 13(26), 715–722.
Legg, C. (2008). The problem of the essential icon. American Philosophical Quarterly, 45(3), 207–232.
Legg, C. (2014). Charles Peirce’s limit concept of truth. Philosophy Compass, 9(3), 204–213.
Lewis, D. (1969). Convention. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lizska, J. J. (1996). A general introduction to the semeiotic of Charles S. Peirce. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Lizska, J. J. (2013). Charles Peirce’s rhetoric and the pedagogy of active learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 45(7), 781–788.
Mayer, R. E. (Ed.). (2014). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1931–1935; 1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vols. 1–6, C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss, Eds.; Vols. 7 and 8, A. Burks, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [cited as CP].
Quine, W. V. O. (1976). Truth by convention, reprinted in The ways of paradox (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Saussure, F. de (1916). Nature of the linguistic sign. In C. Bally & A. Sechehaye (Eds.), Cours de Linguistique Générale [Course in general linguistics]. New York: McGraw Hill Education.
Semetsky, I. (Ed.). (2005). Peirce and education. Special issue of Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(2).
Semetsky, I. (2013). The edusemiotics of images: Essays on the art~science of Tarot. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Semetsky, I., & Stables, A. (Eds.). (2014). Pedagogy and edusemiotics: Theoretical challenges/practical opportunities. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Short, T. L. (1997). Peirce’s theory of signs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stables, A., & Semetsky, I. (2015). Edusemiotics: Semiotic philosophy as educational foundation. London: Routledge.
Stjernfelt, F. (2007). Diagrammatology: An investigation on the borderlines of phenomenology, ontology, and semiotics. Dordrecht: Springer.
Strand, T. (2005). Peirce on education: Nurturing the first rule of reason. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 24(3), 309–316.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Legg, C. (2017). ‘Diagrammatic Teaching’: The Role of Iconic Signs in Meaningful Pedagogy. In: Semetsky, I. (eds) Edusemiotics – A Handbook. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1495-6_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1495-6_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-1493-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-1495-6
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)