Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Jairo G. Ferreira 312 addresses the sign from Peirce (relations between environment, object, and interpretant). The medium corresponds to the icon; the object, to the index; the interpretant, to the symbol. The me- dium (and the icon) is the first; the object (the index) is the sec - ond; the interpretant (the symbol) is the third. This formulation is already sufficiently publicized. In this sense, the icon is the medium of material means (technique and technologies) and immaterial (social symbols). According to Bense (2000), every communicational in- teraction is a relationship between two repertoires of signs, of the emitters and receivers and/or interlocutors, as we prefer to re- fer to when we approach relationships in digital networks. This repertoire (BENSE, 2000) is not homogeneous. In the interaction, there is a shared zone of repertoires, from which a common zone is established, which is strained by the zone of differences. The problem posed by Bense is well situated for our re- flection. The repertoires do not contain homogeneous signs. She does not talk about content. She talks about operations. They are heterogeneous in terms of specific operations: a) the generation of a sign, defined as a succession of relationships: medium -> object -> interpretant. This is the ascending sign: the first, the second, and the third; icon, index, and symbol; abduction, de- duction, and induction. b) the degenerate sign: interpretant -> object -> environment. c) the tetic sign: interpretant (the third) -> the medium (the first) -> the signs (the second). Bense tries to affirm that the repertoires are semiotic operations that interlocutors, in the positions of emitters, re- ceivers, or productive receivers, activate when a particular ob- ject is at play. Therefore, interactions are strained by operations. Cognitive heterogeneity triggers uncertainties and indetermina- tion, with multiple differential positions according to the vari- ous possible operations at stake. In this scheme, the most abstract about circulation, cir- culation demands the artisanal study, analyzing the operations (sign) mobilized by the interlocutors. Bense, however, presents