If the universe is fundamentally semiotic - or 'meaning-based' - something we're allowed to infer by the fact that life emerged on earth, and human
beings evolved a mind which could make meaning with the world around it, then what would be the semiosis of the solar system - of the planets which
exist around our sun? Such a question only becomes relevant in a biosemiotic context, implying that the emergence of life and the modes with which it
makes meaning resembles a ladder relative to the crude 'objectivity' of the planets, which, by themselves, routinely attract whatever space junk
pulls towards it. A legitimate philosophical approach based in an ontological position which sees the physical organism as fundamentally biosemiotic
allows something like the solar system to take on a meaning relative to the creature which draws a resemblance between it, a functional process it
experiences within itself in its living, as well as with concepts like numbers.
Of course, I know this is a basic claim of astrology, numerology and mysticism, but unlike them, I am far more willing to consider this claim as a
hypothesis that requires further empirical inquiry for any hard metaphysical claims to be made. For example, It could be that our particular way of
making meaning is tied into things in ways that are perceived to be coherent to our biology's, without there being any fundamental correlation
between the living of any being in the physical environment around us and what happens within the minds of humans, as is often posited by some
In short, biosemiosis, at its physiological root, may ultimately coherently 'link up' to a larger physiosemiosis at the solar system level. The
'deeper meaning' of the solar system, then, would be something only a human being could make semiotic (and 'metaphysical') contact with.
Simultaneous to this fact, a parsimonious view would consider the solar system to be a naturally emerging phenomenon subject to contingencies that lie
beyond human awareness. This viewpoint, then, is a bit radical: it combines the idea of a genuinely significant semiotic correlation between the
phenomenological experience of the self in relation to its existential knowing in both non-conceptual and conceptual forms, and the planet Earth in
relation to the solar system it is embedded in; as well as the natural and more or less random contingencies of the universe. Said differently, the
basis of 'transcendence' of physical limitations is a result of the effect of contemplating analogies
between the self and the universe and
the resulting energizing affects of awe/wonder on biosmiotic functioning.
This viewpoint integrates facts of 'paranormal' psychology with the natural sciences, but instead of an absolutism which claims absolute importance
of the universe to the human self, there is a parsimonious interpretation which sees human beings as being a naturally evolving mammal-primate which,
having reached a particular threshold of psychological coherence, achieves a sort of 'oneness' with the natural world which affords it powers which
it doesn't have when operating from less meaningful semiotic positions.
An example of how this distinction would begin would be to establish the meaning of our perspective from planet Earth, looking up and out into a sky
that looks like a bounded blue during the day and becomes a near infinite darkness at night.
The Earth refers to our embodiment. In our biosemiotic experience, the feelings of 'being alive' correspond to the tertiary reality of Earth.
Space, meanwhile, refers to our minds, which, like the way space encompasses Earth, encompasses our embodiment with the focal awareness of our
consciousness - or our ability to manually direct our attention both to an experience internally, externally, or imaginatively in thought.
The sun is the source; it is both literally the source of the elements that make up our planet as well as our our own biosemiotic structure.
The sun is the creative principle, which, like the real creative principle of the universe, seems relatively unapproachable.
It cannot be looed upon directly with the eyes; similarly, the self cannot tolerate the intimacy of contemplating the Godhead. All 'sight' or
perception is extinguished, and like the real sun, if one gets too close, the material parts of the body will be disintegrated and torn apart.
Mercury is the first planet. One, or maintaining self identity vis-a-vis contemplation of the source, is like being turned into this planet; one is
crushed into a dense smallness, weighed down by the weight of heavy metals, and completely dominated by the sources gravitational presence.
Venus is the second planet from the sun. The concept of two and the traditional association of venus associates with the concept of 'desire',
'wanting' and 'lust'. Two is just like this; object desired; object sought. It is the self and its object, without any of the sublety of
attunement that allows for any sort of prospering to occur.
Venus is dead; it is one big greenhouse effect; literally speaking, venus is what 'runaway desire' on Earth would do to our planet, rendering it
lifeless and volatile like the dualistic planet Venus.
The third planet from the sun advertises its nature by its tertiarity - Terra - the third.
The triad, or trinity, is the logic of semiosis: icon, index, and symbol; or, self-object and the affect which links them as one larger process.
Mars, fittingly, is the fourth planet, and traditionally associated with strife.
Indeed, is strife not inherently a quadratic function i.e. US vs. THEM, which minimally requires 4 people?
Mars is cold; dead, and cannot sustain an inner core (integrity), and so, no atmosphere - no 'ease of being'.
If Mars (4) is strife, would Jupiter (5) be the conceptual resolution of strife - and hence, the association of Jupiter with 'victory', or with
Anyways, it is when the solar system is contemplated in this sort of way that one can legitimately wonder, is there a one-to-one association of
existential experience of being with the solar systems of our planet?
I am aware that every of one of the conditions of these planets have conditions that are dependent on the influence of the sun on the organization of
the surrounding planets; but this only deepens and heightens the sense of awe and mystery as to how awesomely coherent everything appears to be.
Indeed, it seems probable that science will, after making clear the interpersonal roots of human biosemiotic functioning, may push beyond, after our
traumas are healed, into the deeper zone of what 'everything means'.