According to Charles S. Peirce we have to take
responsibility for our scientiﬁc concepts. Having introduced the scientiﬁc world
to a concept we have to revise it whenever further investigation alters the
meaning of the concept. This article revises the deﬁnition of the fundamental
sign, a concept developed by me and thus my responsibility. I deﬁne it in
relation to Peirce’s formal conditions for communication and community. These
formal conditions make it possible to understand the fundamental sign as part of
a discourse community, carrying the qualities of the community — the sense of
In this article we suggest a possible relation between C. S. Peirce's (1839-1914) concept of metaphor and abduction. To our knowledge Peirce never did analyze nor even mention , the two concepts in the same context. But we understand the hypoiconic metaphor as rooted in the abductive mode of inference; the hypoiconic metaphor is part of an intricate relation between experience, body, inference, and guessing instinct as a semeiotic mechanism which can convey novel ideas.
The seven short comments presented here investigate branding from a pragmatic semeiotic point of view. Comment 1 touches upon the brand in an extreme scholastic realistic point of view. Comment 2 focuses on how the brand becomes represented through its replica. Comment 3 investigates if a threshold of attraction exists, a level beyond which someone becomes attracted to a given brand. Comment 4 touches upon the relation between the object and its representation. Comment 5 investigates the concept “quality branding,” which is the process whereby something becomes endowed with certain qualities. Comment 6 defines the concept quasi-empathy as the basis for self-identification and attraction to a given brand. Comment 7 defines the fundamental sign as the sense of community.