Questions Concerning Certain Faculties Claimed For Signs
Re: FB | Semiotics, Books, Links, News • Jon Awbrey • Dalibor Lošťák
- JA:
- Icon, Index, Symbol and all other classifications are ideal types abstracted from concrete signs and there are no pure types in actual existence. However, it is a consequence of triadic relation irreducibility that symbols are in a genuine sense the generic type while icons and indices are specializations or so-called “degenerate” cases.
- DL:
- I think the first sentence answers the question brilliantly. However, I disagree with your assertion about the “degenerate cases”. It is my understanding that iconicity is the aspect of a sign that represents its Firstness, which is incapable of degeneracy. This also leads me to the notion that fully degenerate Thirdness, as applied to a Symbol, is not an Icon. I would be very interested to read your thoughts on this.
The way I see Categories applying to Peirce’s logic and semiotics may be gleaned from the following Survey page.
The series beginning with the following post might be a good place to start.
Inquiry Into Inquiry 
Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 1 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 2 | Inquiry Into Inquiry
Pingback: Survey of Semiotics, Semiosis, Sign Relations • 3 | Inquiry Into Inquiry