Abstract Charles Peirce insisted that representation is a genuine three-part relation, irreducible to a complex of two-part relations. Demonstrations that two-part relations (like stimulus and response) can be described as three-part are chaff in the wind. Ironically, Peirce’s well-known description in semiotic language of sunflowers makes that error. Until recently, there was scant reason to speak of “sign” – in its full Peircean sense – in biology, computation, or even for unconscious thought. Current developments in computation and animal behavior suggest that triadic relations could be inherent in some classes of their operations, but this article does not find that possibility demonstrated. Instead, the argument is advanced that we should recognize a distinct theory of data (cybernetics) as adequate to describe the role of information in primitive lifeforms. Thus, we adopt definitions that do not support the proposal associated with (though not originating with) Thomas Sebeok, that life and semiosis are coextensive.

中文翻译：

---

计算，认知和意识上的真正三位一体

摘要查尔斯·皮尔斯（Charles Peirce）坚持认为，代表制是真正的三部分关系，不可简化为两部分关系的复合体。两部分关系（如刺激和响应）可描述为三部分的论证是风中的糠ff。具有讽刺意味的是，皮尔斯的著名的向日葵符号语言描述造成了这种错误。直到最近，还没有理由在生物学，计算甚至是无意识的思想中都以皮尔斯式的完整意义来谈论“符号”。计算和动物行为的最新发展表明，三元关系可能是其某些类别的操作所固有的，但本文并未发现这种可能性。反而，有观点认为我们应该认识到一种独特的数据理论（计算机网络学）足以描述信息在原始生命形式中的作用。因此，我们采用的定义不支持与托马斯·塞博克（尽管并非起源于）有关的提议，即生命和符号化是同时存在的。