A Grammar of Human Behavior and Biosemantics

Within the semiotic approach to explaining human behavior, individual actions can be understood as signs expressing senses of other actions. Such an understanding makes it possible to combine the description of actions in the individual and systemic societal perspective. The individual sense of an action refers to a finite number of other actions given to a person both in consciousness and in bodily experience as a whole. Social senses link actions into a single chain and are extracted from the senses of previous actions. This model, while generally correct, is too abstract and requires a more detailed explanation of exactly how senses are extracted. The suggested possible explanation is that actions are mediated by situations in accordance with the formula of K. Lewin: the actual form of behavior is a function of the situation, understood as a set of properties of the acting person and her circumstances. The idea being expressed in the form of rules, according to which a typical form of behavior is performed by a person with a typical social status, being in a typical psychophysiological state and typical circumstances, gets a variant of the so-called “grammar of behavior”, explicating innate predispositions and implicit rules of culture. The question of how to understand the forms of behavior and situations typical for a particular culture can be solved on the basis of the biosemantics of R.G. Millikan. They can be understood as natural conventions — such that two conditions are sufficient for their existence: that they reproduce, and that this reproduction be based on the weight of precedents. Conventional language constructs are understood in biosemantics as lineages of tokens that were copied from each other and copies of which were used for repeated solutions to the same problem. They may have appeared by accident, but they survive and proliferate due to the performance of a vital function. At the same time, it is not at all necessary that the absolute majority of people conform to these conventions, just as the conventions do not have to be explicit prescriptions. Ideas about what forms of behavior are most appropriate in a given situation cannot be the same for different people, but this does not prevent the proliferation of conventional behavior.

1. Abramov R.N., Bykov A.V., Gavrilov K.A., Deviatko I.F., Katernyi I.V., Podvoyskiy D.G., Romanovsky N.V., Sapov V.V. (2017) Norms and Morality in Sociological Theory: From Classical Conceptions to New Ideas, Moscow: Ves Mir, 2017. — in Russ.

2. Bourdieu P. The Logic of Practice, Saint Petersburg: Aletheia. — in Russ.

3. Deleuze G. (1998) The Logic of Sense, Moscow: Raritet. — in Russ.

4. Derrida J. (2000) Of Grammatology, Moscow: Ad Marginem. — in Russ.

5. Zolyan S. T., Chernov I.А. (1977) About the Structure of the Language of Behaviour Description. Σημειωτκή — Sign Systems Studies, 8(1): 151-163. — in Russ.

6. Lewin K. (2000) Field Theory in Social Science, Saint Petersburg: Rech. — in Russ.

7. Lewin K. (2001) Dynamic Psychology. Selected Papers, Moscow: Smysl. — in Russ.

8. Levi-Strauss (2001) Structural Anthropology, Moscow: EKSMO-Press. — in Russ.

9. Serikov A.E. (2009) The Semiotic Model of Action. Sociological journal, 1: 19-46. — in Russ.

10. Serikov A.E. (2021) Some bases for comparing different approaches to language grammar. I.V. Demin (ed.) History. Semiotics. Culture. Collection of materials of the International scientific conference dedicated to the 200th anniversary of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky and the 150th anniversary of Sergei Nikolaevich Bulgakov, Samara: Samara Academy of Humanities: 259-266. — in Russ.

11. Wilson E.O. Genesis: The Deep Origin of Societies, Moscow: Alpina non fiction. — in Russ.

12. Fox K. (2014) Watching the English: The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour (2nd ed.), London: Hodder.

13. Funder D.C. (2009) Persons, behaviors and situations: An agenda for personality psychology in the postwar era. Journal of Research in Personality, 43 (2): 120-126. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.041

14. Lewis D. (1969) Convention: A Philosophical Study, Harvard: Harvard University Press.

15. Lewis D. (1975) Languages and Language. K. Gunderson (ed.) Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press: 3-35.

16. Matczak M. (2022) Ruth G. Millikan’s conventionalism and law. Legal Theory, 28 (2): 146-178.

17. Millikan R.G. (1998) Language Conventions Made Simple. The Journal of Philosophy, 95 (4): 161-180.

18. Millikan R.G. (2017) Beyond Concepts: Unicepts, Language, and Natural Information, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

19. Millikan R.G. (2018) Biosemantics and Words that Don’t Represent. Theoria, 84 (3): 229-241.

20. Mischel W. (1968) Personality and Assessment, New York: Wiley.

21. Runciman W.G. (2009) The Theory of Cultural and Social Selection, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.