Meaning is a privilege not a right.
Not all pictures depict.
Not all signs denote.
Never confuse a property of a sign,
just for instance, existence,
with a sign of a property,
for instance, existence.
Taking a property of a sign
for a sign of a property
is the zeroth sign of
nominal thinking
and the first
mistake.
Also Sprach 0*
9 October 2002
cc: Cybernetics • Ontolog Forum • Structural Modeling • Systems Science
cc: FB | Semeiotics • Laws of Form (1) (2) • Peirce List (1) (2) (3)
Inquiry Into Inquiry 
Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 7 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
I learned something like this in undergrad as The Fallacy of Rules: to wrongly assume that a descriptive rule is actually a prescriptive rule. For example, I observe birds on a beach eating seaweed, and then later observe similar birds inland eating berries. I conclude that they must be two different species, because I have improperly assumed the behavior I observed is a defining property.
Just found this on Facebook – shared by Mi Robin. It expanded my heart, and made me breathe a little more deeply. Lovely. Thanks for putting it on the webs.
Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Comment 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Discussion 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Discussion 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Zeroth Law Of Semiotics • Discussion 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 4 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 5 | Inquiry Into Inquiry