Understanding Media and technological abstraction in the age of AI involves understanding Semiotics, a field we rarely hear about, although it was foundational for McLuhan and others who study media.
It so happens that one of the leading lights of the French New Wave, Jean Luc Godard, had studied ethnology and semiotics at the Sorbonne after the war, and was hugely influential for film theory gong forward. Semiotics and film theory are very much still with us today as we try to understand media.
Like much of McLuhan, Semiotics can seem circular and too self reflexive.
It seems unavoidable… as we are embedded in the given means by which we are perceiving the world. Realizing how those means work to create our world.. is like a dog chasing its tail. Does it ever catch it?
Semiotics is an attempt to put a frame around that chasing so that we can see it for what it is. Still, very challenging field, as a good part of our preceptive process is not usually conscious. Which is why those using psychedelics to “open the doors of perception” as Huxley had it, can sometimes watch themselves assembling a reality.
The below essay by ChatGPT5 is quick take overview on Semiotics.
(And following this, there will be a more in depth white paper posted at PSA website also by ChatGPT5 in response to PSA formative queries titled: “From Signs to Systems: Semiotics, McLuhan, and the Meaning of Media in the Age of AI“)
__________________________________________________________________
1. Origins of Semiotics: Ancient and Early Modern Roots
- The idea that signs mediate understanding goes back to Greek philosophy, particularly Plato and Aristotle, who distinguished between the thing, the word, and the idea.
- The Stoics further developed this into a triad—signifier, signified, and referent—anticipating modern models.
- In Christian thought, St. Augustine (4th–5th century) explored divine and natural signs, establishing an early theology of communication (how signs reveal truth, divine or human).
- Through the medieval scholastics, signs were linked to epistemology—how humans can know reality through representation.
2. Founding Modern Semiotics: Saussure and Peirce (Late 19th–Early 20th Century)
- Ferdinand de Saussure (Swiss linguist):
- Saw language (langue) as a structured system of differences between signs.
- Each sign has two inseparable parts:
- Signifier: the form (sound or image)
- Signified: the concept or meaning
- Crucially, the relation is arbitrary—no inherent link connects word and meaning; it’s culturally assigned.
- His focus: language as a self-contained system, not as individual acts of speaking (parole).
- Charles Sanders Peirce (American philosopher):
- Offered a more open-ended, triadic model:
- Sign → Object → Interpretant (the mental understanding).
- Emphasized process and infinite semiosis—the idea that every interpretation becomes a new sign in an ongoing chain.
- His system anticipated cybernetics and systems theory, influencing communication models and AI logic later.
- Offered a more open-ended, triadic model:
3. Structuralism: The Mid-20th-Century Expansion
- Claude Lévi-Strauss, Roland Barthes, and Umberto Eco applied Saussure’s linguistics to anthropology, myth, and culture.
- Key idea: All cultural expressions—myths, fashion, film, advertising—can be analyzed as systems of signs.
- Barthes’ “Mythologies” (1957):
- Everyday cultural artifacts operate as “second-order” sign systems, encoding ideological messages.
- For example, a photo of a soldier saluting the flag signifies patriotism—a “myth” constructed through cultural codes.
- Structuralists aimed to uncover the deep grammar underlying human behavior and meaning systems.
4. Post-Structuralism and Deconstruction (1970s–1990s)
- Thinkers like Jacques Derrida, Julia Kristeva, and Michel Foucault challenged the structuralist belief in fixed meanings.
- Derrida’s “différance” emphasized that meaning is always deferred—signs gain meaning only through their difference from others.
- Semiotics became less about stable systems and more about play, ambiguity, and power in meaning.
- Umberto Eco’s “Open Work” (1962): interpretation is not fixed but continuously recreated by the audience.
5. Contemporary Semiotics: Digital, AI, and Media Environments (2000–Today)
- With digital media, semiotics expanded into visual, algorithmic, and interface semiotics.
- The “sign” now includes icons, emojis, algorithmic recommendations, virtual objects—non-verbal yet meaning-laden elements.
- AI systems can now interpret or generate signs—raising the question: Can machines participate in semiosis, or do they merely simulate it?
- Current scholars (e.g., Luciano Floridi) frame this within infosphere theory—the total ecology of informational relations between humans and machines.
6. McLuhan’s Understanding Media: The Medium as Sign-System
Now, contrasting McLuhan with semiotics:
| Aspect | Semiotics | McLuhan’s Media Theory |
|---|---|---|
| Core Idea | Meaning arises from the relations among signs. | The medium itself shapes human perception and society. |
| Primary Unit of Analysis | The sign (word, image, object). | The medium (print, television, digital). |
| View of Meaning | Meaning is constructed through difference, codes, and interpretation. | Meaning is restructured by the sensory and social effects of technology. |
| Temporal Focus | Concerned with how signs mean at a given moment or in a cultural context. | Concerned with historical transformations in human perception caused by new media. |
| Agency | Human and cultural systems create signs. | Media environments act on humans—extending senses, reorganizing consciousness. |
| Example | A Coca-Cola ad is analyzed for the mythic meanings of happiness and Americana. | Television is analyzed as a hot or cool medium that reconfigures how people relate to time, space, and community. |
In other words:
- Semiotics is about content: what signs mean, and how systems of signs encode values.
- McLuhan is about form: how the medium through which signs travel changes our cognition and social structure.
To McLuhan, “the medium is the message” — meaning the form of communication (print, radio, screen, algorithm) has more societal impact than the message’s content itself.
To semioticians, the message is the message, and analysis decodes how it conveys ideology or emotion through sign systems.
7. Synthesis: Where Semiotics and McLuhan Meet
- Both fields share a concern for mediation—how experience and meaning are constructed rather than direct.
- McLuhan’s later notion of media as extensions of human faculties aligns with Peirce’s idea that signs extend human thought into the world.
- In digital culture, these two merge: interfaces are both media (technological extensions) and sign systems(semiotic environments).
- For example, a smartphone isn’t just a tool—it’s a living semiotic ecosystem that shapes attention, memory, and identity.
8. Where It’s Going (Next 5–10 Years)
- AI-generated semiotics: algorithms producing and interpreting signs autonomously—memes, texts, deepfakes—create a new domain of “synthetic meaning.”
- Neuro-semiotics: linking sign systems to neural processes, suggesting that semiosis might be a general property of intelligent systems.
- Eco-semiotics: applying semiotic models to ecology and communication between living systems (plants, animals, AI).
- The semiotic tradition may become a foundation for understanding AI consciousness—if we view thought itself as a kind of semiosis.
TL;DR Summary
- Semiotics studies how signs generate meaning; it evolved from linguistic and philosophical roots into a broad analysis of culture and media.
- McLuhan focused on how media reshape human perception and society—the sensory, structural effects rather than content.
- Together, they form complementary halves: semiotics decodes meaning, while McLuhan explains the medium that makes that meaning possible.
- In the digital and AI age, both converge—because the medium (AI systems) now actively participates in generating and interpreting the signs themselves.