Search

While addressing the decolonial critique of Eurocentric modernity and the call for alternative cosmo-visions, this article retraces Juri Lotman's culturological exploration towards the concept of ternarity [mephaphocmb]: the scrutiny of the so-called binarism is what connects - without overlapping - the two perspectives. This long-distance dialogue will be built starting with the key notion of binary opposition, which will be analysed as a decolonial problem (Part I) and as a culturological problem (Part II). The analysis will focus on two central issues that stem from the either-or logic: the "othering mindset", and the culture-nature dualism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most accounts of Yuri Lotman’s legacy describe the evolution of his oeuvre from structuralism to a systemic version of post-structuralism. This article, however, suggests that Lotman valued highly the heuristic possibilities of the structural method throughout his career – he saw that, as a methodological approach, it enables the whole sphere of cultural studies to be taken into the realm of ‘science’. Lotman connected structuralism with semiotics and, as a result, produced a hybrid in the form of structural semiotics. Over time he enriched the structural method by making it more flexible, so that it could encompass as many cultural phenomena as possible. The principal difficulties in a structural description of a text arose from a fundamental conflict that exists between the integral and the dynamic nature of the text, and the static and analytical nature of the description. For Lotman, the way to make description more dynamic was to multiply the number of descriptions. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]