Papers by Morten Tønnessen
Biosemiotics. Journal/Biosemiotics, Mar 15, 2024
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Oct 10, 2023
Whether or to what extent Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can measure human development is disputed.... more Whether or to what extent Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can measure human development is disputed. This article develops a notion of "wasted GDP", with a case study on the performance of the USA based on analysis of Human Development Index (HDI) data. Like Herman Daly's notion of 'uneconomic growth', the perspective of wasted GDP addresses the benefits and costs of economic growth and favors prioritization of policies that promote genuinely sustainable wellbeing. Over the last three decades, the USA has fallen behind several other highly developed countries in the HDI, despite solid economic growth. More than 20 countries, large and small, now outperform the USA on the Human Development Index, and 27 countries currently do better than the USA by nonincome HDI. 21 countries outperform the USA by this measure despite having a lower GDP per capita. The notion of "wasted GDP" implies that GDP is wasted if it does not support welfare. While a country´s welfare performance is measured by nonincome HDI, a comparison with better-performing countries that have a lower GDP indicates the share of GDP that is wasted from a human development perspective. The results, based on highly conservative estimates, show that the top 5 performers by lowest GDP per capita achieve better outcomes than the USA with an average GDP per capita that is 37.5% lower. All better performers achieve better outcomes with an average GDP per capita that is 26.9% lower. Without any wasted GDP, the annual US CO 2 emissions could have been at least 1.268 million tonnes lower (all better performers estimate) and possibly as much as 1.767 million tonnes lower (top 5 performers estimate), accounting for 3.6-5.0% of global emissions. Similarly, the USA´s material footprint could have been between 2.625 million and 3.659 million tonnes lower, accounting for 2.7-3.8% of humanity´s global material footprint.
Routledge eBooks, Sep 23, 2022
Sign Systems Studies, Oct 1, 2009
Sign Systems Studies, Jun 29, 2012
PDC Homepage Home » Products » Purchase. LOGIN; PRODUCTS: All Products; Online Resources; Journal... more PDC Homepage Home » Products » Purchase. LOGIN; PRODUCTS: All Products; Online Resources; Journals & Series; Digital Media; Books & Reference Works. MEMBERSHIPS: Societies & Associations; Conference Registrations. E-COLLECTION: About; Alphabetically; By Category; By Type; Price Lists; Terms and Conditions. SERVICES: Conference Exhibits; Conference Registrations; Electronic Publishing; Journal Advertising; Mailing Lists; Marketing ...
Bloomsbury Academic eBooks, 2023
Child & Youth Services, Mar 7, 2022
Quodlibet eBooks, Jun 27, 2023
Environmental Philosophy, 2016
DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals), Dec 1, 2016
Urban corvids such as crows and magpies are large, intelligent birds that are accustomed to human... more Urban corvids such as crows and magpies are large, intelligent birds that are accustomed to humans. Unlike doves and smaller birds, they are hardly ever fed by intent. Instead, they thrive in the shadows, as it were, of human civilization. More precisely, they tend to follow our movements and activities, with an occasional sneakpeek into what we are doing whenever we are not paying attention.
De Gruyter eBooks, Mar 6, 2023
Pakistan Journal of Historical Studies, 2016
Abstract:Wolves and sheep go together—at least in the public mind. In terms of ecological range, ... more Abstract:Wolves and sheep go together—at least in the public mind. In terms of ecological range, they are among the most widespread mammals of wild and domesticated species respectively. While the wolf is in several countries the most controversial large carnivore, it is also, and not coincidentally, the most symbolically laden western carnivore. The wolf is a symbol of large carnivores, governmental interference in local issues, freedom and authenticity, evil, hunger, sexuality, etc. Sheep, on the other hand, represent among other things innocence and vulnerability and, of course, food, wool and thus economic value. The juxtaposition of the symbolism of wolves and sheep go all the way back to the Bible, if not even further. In the Bible, this archetypical opposition is only resolved in the vision of a new Earth and new Heavens when, in this new paradise, ‘[t]he wolf and the lamb will feed together'.2 Familiarity with the cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is arguably a pre-condition for fully understanding the fierce human emotions that are invoked in social and political conflict over wolf management and conservation. Although there are local variations and even though imagery and symbolism can change over time, the background noise, as it were, of the historical cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep is significant practically wherever there are, or were, wolves. In this article I will discuss the symbolism of wolves and sheep from a historical point of view to make sense of developments in animal imagery. My discussion will show the perceptions of humans about animals and how the representations of wolves and sheep are often used to construct human identities. The cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is just as telling about who we are as humans and how we think about ourselves, as it is about actual wolves and sheep.
Zeitschrift für Semiotik, Aug 3, 2018
Who was John Deely? For many years to come that question will be raised. Opinions will differ. He... more Who was John Deely? For many years to come that question will be raised. Opinions will differ. He was a passionate intellectual. He was not always right, but when he was wrong, he tended to be wrong in interesting ways. He was a learned man and a lover of cheap puns. His thinking was radically historical, radically independent of the considerations of others, and in some respects radically new. He wanted to rewrite history. Not only the history of semiotics, but furthermore the history of philosophy, or more generally the history of human being in the world. Provocatively, he stated that semiotics was the future of philosophy (Deely 2001), thinking that no valid philosophical enterprise could disregard the world of signs and what semiotics has to say about human being. He likewise thought that semioethics was the future of ethics. He was a supporter and practitioner of biosemiotics, and thought that in order to grasp the full range of the world of signs, biosemiotics would have to make up an important part of semiotics at large. Like modern Peircean semioticians, he was convinced that nature is perfused with signs (Peirce 1998 [1906]). He thought that ethics had to start with the realization that it is the semiotic capabilities of the human being that results in moral responsibility and thus a unique perspective on the world. On this simple fact he dwelled in paper after paper. His genius was that he saw marvels where others saw matters of facts. Biosemiotics, and semiotics in general, owes more to John Deely than it might recognize. From its terminology to the slowly dawning awareness of the background of semiosis against which all human semiotics functions, John had an vertiginous ability to follow his fractal thoughts to the minutiae of medieval history and to the grandeur of the logical infinity of semiosis. His serious defiance against small-mindedness in the semiotician's imagination pushed those in the field to reassess their assumptions about the limits and origins of semiosis. Forging into uncharted waters almost com-brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk provided by Open Access Zeitschriften des Universitätsverlages der...
Sign Systems Studies
This article introduces an ecosemiotic approach to the two great challenges facing humanity in th... more This article introduces an ecosemiotic approach to the two great challenges facing humanity in the 21st century: solving an escalating environmental crisis, while also safeguarding and further improving human living conditions. An ecosemiotic framework for the study of societal transformations is presented and political and other normative aspects of what I call transformative semiotics are discussed. This envelops socio-cultural and socio-ecological developments framed in terms of umwelt theory and Deep Ecology. In the long run, developments in human ecology as reflected in our changing relations to non-humans are expressed in the umwelt trajectory of humankind. The question of how the environmental crisis can best be solved is therefore tantamount to the question about what direction the human umwelt trajectory should take in this century. I outline different plausible umwelt scenarios for human ecology in the 21st century, focused on business-as-usual, ecomodernist and Deep Ecolo...
Biosemiotics
Although Jakob von Uexküll´s Umwelt theory is not mentioned in Jablonka and Ginsburg´s Target art... more Although Jakob von Uexküll´s Umwelt theory is not mentioned in Jablonka and Ginsburg´s Target article, von Uexküll´s theory is clearly relevant in the context of the article, with the authors´ emphasis on the origin of “subjective experiencing”. I relate some of Jablonka and Ginsburg´s main claims to an evolutionary perspective on Umwelt theory. As it turns out, the Umwelt has multiple evolutionary origins depending on our exact definition(s) of Umwelt.
Biosemiotics, 2021
The Annual Biosemiotic Achievement Award was established at the annual meeting of the Internation... more The Annual Biosemiotic Achievement Award was established at the annual meeting of the International Society for Biosemiotic Studies (ISBS) in 2014, in conjunction with Springer and Biosemiotics. It seeks to recognize papers published in the journal that present novel and potentially important contributions to biosemiotic research, its scientific impact and its future prospects. Here the winner of the Biosemiotic Achievement Award for 2020 is announced: The award goes to Filip Jaroš and Matěj Pudil for the article “Cognitive systems of human and non-human animals: At the crossroads of phenomenology, ethology and biosemiotics”.
Uploads
Papers by Morten Tønnessen
In this paper, a semiotic approach is used to explain the essence and proper methodology of socialization of wolves with humans for animal welfare purposes. Emphasis is put on understanding the changes in the animal’s Umwelt and in the human–animal relationship. The interdisciplinary theoretical contribution will be supported by Laura Kiiroja’s practical experiences with socialization of wolves in USA and Germany, and by Morten Tønnessen’s studies of wolf socialization in two Norwegian zoos (Langedrag mountain farm and wildlife park and Polar Zoo). Additionally, Kiiroja has conducted semi-structured interviews with world-recognized experts.
The study explains how proper socialization aims to change the human’s significance in the animal’s Umwelt from enemy to social partner. This requires social human-imprinting, and using consistently positive methods of taming and handling. In fact, using aversive techniques, such as dominance theory and punishment, damages socialization and results in dangerous situations. Working “on animal terms” and establishing effective inter-specific communication is crucial for avoiding conflicts and maintaining positive and healthy relationships. The authors suggest that a zoosemiotic approach complements more mainstream ethological knowledge in human–animal interactions and is capable of advancing animal welfare as well as give zoo visitors more realistic experiences of wolves.
The pros and cons of socializing captive wolves will be analysed. Animal welfare will improve with more opportunities for enrichment, less stressful effect of visitors, and better veterinary routines and husbandry practices. Avoiding suffering caused by constant fear enables the animal to display a quite complete species-specific behavioural repertoire. This is a benefit for behavioural research on captive wolves. Additionally, seeing the wolves in close proximity or interacting with them triggers empathy and interest in visitors, and this may contribute positively to support for wolf conservation. On the downside, zoos and other facilities keeping socialized wolves should be aware of the possibility that visitors might misinterpret wolves as potential pets, and adjust their education program accordingly. The management of these facilities should furthermore invest in educated wolf personnel, to be able to meet the requirements of proper wolf socialization.
The juxtaposition of the symbolism of wolves and sheep go all the way back to the Bible, if not even further. In the Bible, this archetypical opposition is only resolved in the vision of a new Earth and new Heavens, when, in this new paradise, “[t]he wolf and the lamb will feed together” (Isaiah 65:25). Meanwhile, everybody “knows” that wolves prey on sheep. However, many would be surprised to learn that in Norway, wolves over time only account for 4–5% of depredation on sheep (Rovdata). This demonstrates the way in which people are informed not only by facts, but also by cultural imagery.
Familiarity with the cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is arguably a precondition for fully understanding the fierce human emotions that are invoked in social and political conflicts on wolf management and conservation. Although there are local variations, and even though imagery and symbolism can change over time, the “background noise”, as it were, of the historical cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep is significant practically wherever there are, or were, wolves.
In this paper I will present central and illustrative examples of the symbolism of wolves and sheep from a historical point of view. The historical perspective will help making sense of developments in animal imagery. The topic matter is of interest not only because it says something about how we conceive of animals, but also because our representations of wolves and sheep are often used to construct human identities. As a matter of fact, the cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is just as telling about who we are, as humans, and how we think about ourselves, as it is about actual wolves and sheep.
Acknowledgement: This work has been carried out thanks to the support of the research project Animals in Changing Environments: Cultural Mediation and Semiotic Analysis (EEA Norway Grants/Norway Financial Mechanism 2009–2014 under project contract no. EMP151).
Reference
Rovdata. http://www.rovdata.no.
In the past two decades, biosemioticians such as Jesper Hoffmeyer and Kalevi Kull have began to tease out the ethical implications of biosemiotics. This impetus has continued in the last decade, with a new generation of scholars attending to this core issue. The foundational argument is that if semiosis is a morally-relevant capacity, and if all living systems are semiotic, then biosemiosis can serve as the basis for justifying the attribution of moral status to humans, to animals, and in a larger perspective to all living beings. Biosemiotic ethics opens the road towards a non-functional ecological perspective that doesn't reduce other beings and ecosystems to their usefulness for human existence.
The issue has been guest-edited and prefaced by Morten Tønnessen, Jonathan Beever and Yogi Hale Hendlin, and contains original research articles by John Deely, Andreas Weber, Hans Werner Ingensiep, Jessica Ullrich, Konrad Ott, Gerald Ostdiek, and by the guest editors, and an interview with the legendary pioneer of the field, Wendy Wheeler.