BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Biosemiotics - ECPv6.17.4.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Biosemiotics
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Vienna
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20220327T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20221030T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20230326T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20231029T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20240331T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20241027T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T163000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T170000
DTSTAMP:20231029T103313Z
CREATED:20230624T090521Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231029T103313Z
UID:1447-1690821000-1690822800@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Claudio Rodríguez
DESCRIPTION:Vis-à-vis: Signification Does Not Necessitate Any Kind of Backward Causation\nClaudio Rodríguez\nThe following presentation will argue that no account of signification—be it semantic\, semiotic or organic—requires appealing to backward causation. \nJohn Deely’s views on the relevance of vis a prospecto and vis a tergo as well as their connection to sign virtuality are ontologically expensive as a result of a framework that calls for other specific features to make signification actual. \nI will argue here that signification is\, on the contrary\, a parsimonious phenomenon\, metaphysically speaking\, and that accounts of backwards causation build instead a kind of explanation of the metarelations of signification that does not map to actual significative relations. \n[Slides from the lecture]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/rodriguez/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T163000
DTSTAMP:20230727T183738Z
CREATED:20230624T090521Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230727T183738Z
UID:1446-1690819200-1690821000@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Coffee break
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/coffee-break-2/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T153000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T160000
DTSTAMP:20231029T103128Z
CREATED:20230624T090620Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231029T103128Z
UID:1450-1690817400-1690819200@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Victoria Alexander
DESCRIPTION:The Creativity of Cells: Aneural Irrational Cognition\nVictoria Alexander\nBaluška and Levin’s (2016) review of the literature on aneural cognition in single-celled organisms\, plants\, and animal tissues is focused on what might be called rational biological processes\, using inherited or habituated signal pathways. The authors do not touch upon the extent to which simple organisms and cells are capable of irrational cognition. Human memory is not always the result of conditioning that locks in the most statistically relevant information about the environment.  \nTechniques for memorization available to humans use rhyme\, rhythm\, tone and other poetic devices\, such as metaphor\, metonymy\, and symbolism. The mind-palace technique forms memories via arbitrary association and does not require multiple repetitions as straight rote learning does. People with synesthesia are better able to recall arbitrary facts because numbers or letters may have for them a unique color\, texture or shape. Synesthesia studies have contributed to an understanding of how the subconscious works in a cross-modal manner. These types of memory formation do not conform to what we may think of as typical logical operations. \nI will argue that certain conscious mnemonic devices may have evolved from aneural semiosic mechanisms. The physical properties of sign-vehicles in signal pathways—insofar as they may be coincidentally similar to or coincidentally proximate to\, or arbitrarily connected to a component of the pathway—may lead to radical change in the function of the pathway. The self-organized emergent patterns that result from such lower-level “poetic” flexibility may be more robust and more efficient than patterns that require precisely determined categorically-correct local interactions. Such processes would flow easily to the lowest energy state. These aesthetic processes may underlie the most significant evolutionary adaptations\, as well as what might be called learning by insight or having an epiphany.  \nThe code duality model of Emmeche and Hoffmeyer (1991) can account for the apparently paradoxical situation wherein the physicality that grounds sign relations can also provide the physical qualities by which new (sometimes irrational) relationships can begin to form. As the effects of local sign-readings interact in the process of self-organization\, these qualities provide the constraints that engender semiotic freedom\, as well as the forgiving imprecision that leads to regularity. \nI will illustrate local sign “misreadings” with examples of laboratory manipulations of pea plants that cause them to pursue wind as an index sign of light\, virus conformations that “trick” the body with molecular mimicry\, and the use of a conjugate to encrypt self with non-self leading to an autoimmune reaction. In these cases\, the normal pathway is not simply broken or blocked\, it is co-opted. Thus\, it becomes possible to see how novel evolutionary adaptations might use similar aesthetic mechanisms to repurpose existing pathways.  \n  \n  \nReferences \nBaluška\, F.\, & Levin\, M. (2016). On Having No Head: Cognition throughout Biological Systems. Frontiers in Psychology\, 7. \nEmmeche\, C.\, & Hoffmeyer\, J. (1991). Code-duality and the semiotics of nature. In M. Anderson & F. Merrell (Eds.)\, On semiotic modeling (pp. 117–166). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. \n[Slides from the presentation]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/alexander/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T153000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T153000
DTSTAMP:20231029T095240Z
CREATED:20230624T090619Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231029T095240Z
UID:1449-1690817400-1690817400@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Josh Bacigalupi
DESCRIPTION:Semiosic Agency: Self-regulated Habituation of Ever-novel Signs via Affective Field\nJosh Bacigalupi\nAt the conclusion of our group’s presentation at last year’s gatherings\, we received two questions that this presentation will address: one from Alexei Sharov on the nature of agency and another from Vinicius Romanini on the nature of virtuality. This presentation will endeavor to rigorously characterize agency via virtuality. This project’s approach to virtuality (Bacigalupi 2022) – a dynamically sustained potential in continuous exchange with actuality\, or structure – will be further explicated via the self-regulation of the habituation of ever-novel signs\, all of which necessarily entails a continuous and transfinite affective field. \nBoth Sharov (2021) and Romanini (2006) have written on the subjects of their respective questions. It is therefore a great opportunity to respond with some level of rigor. To do this\, this presentation will start with the question of Semiosic Agency: what is it? \nA possible answer will be organized into three main sections: the first section will frame the proposed model as a tension in the continuous exchange between virtual and actual dynamics; to continuously engage and resolve this tension\, a physically grounded affective field will be proposed in the second section\, which will explain how ever-novel signs can be habituated from this tension; the final section will demonstrate that\, in addition to habituating novel signs\, the system must self-regulate itself so as to avoid perennial “death-states” of over- and under-coherence. The ever-evolving state of this system coherence will be inhered within the affective field\, which will serve as an index for semiosic viability. And self-regulation to maintain this viability involves two simultaneous\, non-stochastic and non-algorithmic choices with respect to this index on coherence: either tendency – deciding to “stay the course” – or drive – deciding to change the operational course. It will be argued that it is these existential ever-present choices\, and the afore-described dynamics manifesting them\, that constitute veritable Semiosic Agency. \n  \nReferences \nBacigalupi\, J. A. (2022). Semiogenesis: A Dynamic System Approach to Agency and Structure. Biosemiotics\, 15(2)\, 261–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-022-09494-8 \nRomanini\, V. (2006\, January 1). Minute Semeiotic Speculations on the Grammar of Signs and Communication based on the work of C. S. Peirce. \nSharov\, A.\, & Tønnessen\, M. (2021). Semiotic Agency: Science beyond Mechanism (Vol. 25). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89484-9 \n[Slides from the presentation]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/bacigalupi/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T143000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T150000
DTSTAMP:20231029T095048Z
CREATED:20230624T090521Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231029T095048Z
UID:1448-1690813800-1690815600@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Yagmur Denizhan & Vefa Karatay
DESCRIPTION:Origins and Phases\nYagmur Denizhan & Vefa Karatay\nClassically\, the quest for the origin of a complex and dynamic entity -be it life\, mind or semiosis- seems to demand an explanation of how this entity may have spontaneously emerged as a functioning whole without any prior equivalent. Analysing the full-fledged system one can identify its components\, but these are typically too complex and too specific themselves to have emerged independently and to have self-organised as a coordinated system after a chance encounter. Therefore\, the main challenge of origin questions is to find scenarios of how simple unstructured systems can become structurally and/or functionally more complex without a deus ex machina. A plausible scenario for the increase of complexity seems compartmentalisation in a system. \nThe spontaneous emergence of compartments of different viscosity in a mixed liquid (the so-called Liquid-Liquid Phase Separation) is a long-known phenomenon in physics. An equivalent of such relaxation processes involving biological matter first stroke biologists’ attention in the context of pathological conditions such as amyloid formation in some neurodegenerative diseases. Yet progress in scientific research demonstrated that the emergence of separate domains with distinct phases plays an equally important role in healthy life processes. The expansion of research interests eventually created a need for a more general notion than Liquid-Liquid Phase Separation. Some recent research articles suggest the more general term Phase Separation (PS) in order to also include separation processes involving biological macromolecules that can take on various tunable viscoelastic phases that cannot be categorised as a liquid. Also\, the energetic character of phase separation has a richer repertoire in biology: while it is typically a passive relaxation process in physics\, in biology also active control mechanisms can be at work in compartmentalisation and complexification. It is not a coincidence that models for the origin of life-from Oparin’s coacervation hypothesis (1924) to the more recent ones such as Sharov’s “Coenzyme World” model-all rely on LLPS mechanisms. \nMore than half a century before the recent findings of biophysics on the significance of phase separation\, Gilbert Simondon borrowed the same notion from physics and generalised it as one of the critical concepts of his ontogenetic theory [1]. In order to have an all-embracing theory\, he differentiates between three operational modes of the process of individuation: physical\, vital and psycho-collective. His theory places at the beginning of any process of individuation the so-called pre-individual being\, which is in a state of pure potentiality and tension where no phases exist. In this metastable state\, the slightest perturbation can unleash the process of individuation leading to the emergence of different phases both as spatial compartments (topological domains at distinct phases of matter) and temporal ones (distinct stages of the process). Simondon calls this operation phase separation (“dephasing” – Fr. se dephaser). In the physical mode of individuation\, phase separation refers to the same relaxation process known in physics\, which ends at a stable state where all tensions are resolved and all potential becoming are exhausted. In more complex systems\, however\, the conflicts and tensions within the pre-individual being can only be partially resolved\, such that some portion always remains unresolved as “pre-individual charge”\, leaving room for further individuation. Therefore\, one can say that phase separation offers a mechanism not only for the origin of life but also for the permanent origination potential that is characteristic of life. \nWhen interpreted in the light of Simondon’s Theory of Individuation\, the thriving findings of biophysics research on phase separation can be said to demonstrate how vital individuation operates at the molecular level\, generating structures and processes with limited stability. Some of these can be further stabilised by new phase-tuning mechanisms that emerge at later stages of individuation and thereby constitute strictly conserved codes\, while others remain less stable and\, therefore\, more prone to external influences. This reminds us of the Code Duality thesis proposed by Hoffmeyer and Emmeche [2] as ‘the chain of events which sets life apart from non-life…. needs at least two codes: one code for action (behaviour) and one code for memory’\, and seems to offer an explanation of how these different codes may have emerged in the course of vital individuation. \n  \nReferences \nHoffmeyer\, J.\, & Emmeche\, C. (1991). Code-duality and the semiotics of nature. In M. Anderson & F. Merrell (Eds.)\, On semiotic modeling (pp. 117–166). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. \nSimondon G. (2020). Individuation in light of notions of form and information. Translated by: Adkins\, T. University of Minnesota Press. \n[Slides from the presentation]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/denizhan-karatay/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T130000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T143000
DTSTAMP:20230727T183825Z
CREATED:20230624T090505Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230727T183825Z
UID:1442-1690808400-1690813800@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Lunch
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/lunch/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T123000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T130000
DTSTAMP:20231029T094608Z
CREATED:20230624T090505Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231029T094608Z
UID:1441-1690806600-1690808400@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Matthew McTeigue
DESCRIPTION:Semiosis\, Sense-Making and the Being of the Between: Reconciling Autopoietic Enactivism and Biosemiotics through Relational Biology\nMatthew McTeigue\nThis talk will investigate the autopoietist’s theory of the continuity between life and mind under the auspices of a biosemiotic approach to enactivist philosophy of mind\, with a view to resolve a deep-seated tension between the essence of life and mind (cognition). As proponents of the theory claim\, where we find life\, we find mind. Life and mind derive from the same set of organizational and functional properties\, and those that define mind are an enriched version of those fundamental to life. In particular\, it is those self-organizing features of mind which are enriched from those typifying life. The talk proceeds in a three-fold manner. Firstly\, it queries the foundation of autopoietic theory to uncover the roots of the multi-varied criticisms levelled at the thesis. Secondly\, it looks at the recent controversy between classical autopoietic theory and advocates of the free-energy principle and predictive processing theories\, who contend autopoiesis fails to account for the anticipatory and future-oriented aspect of cognition. Thirdly\, biosemiotic enactivism is shown to heal this disharmony by providing a more robust theory of autopoietic self-organization via Peirce and biosemiotics\, not only more thoroughly grounded in the metaphysics of complex and self-organizing systems which underpin both the autopoietic and biosemiotics paradigm\, but also through a demonstration of the sign as a unifying foundation of both autopoietic self-organization and meaning and anticipation. Finally\, it will be argued that modelling biosemiosis under the auspices of autopoietic biology and anticipatory systems gives a far richer and nuanced picture of the dynamics of the sign simply unavailable to classical semioticians\, and does justice to the prescience and insight of C.S Peirce. Ultimately\, a biosemiotic contextualization of autopoiesis is touted as an attractive via media between enactivism and free-energy and predictive processing approaches.  \n[Slides from the lecture]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/mcteigue/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T123000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T130000
DTSTAMP:20230727T183844Z
CREATED:20230624T090504Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230727T183844Z
UID:1440-1690806600-1690808400@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Daniel Mayer-Foulkes
DESCRIPTION:The Nature of Living Being: Distinguishing Distinctions\nThe main ideas of the recently published book in the Biosemiotics series\, The Nature of Living Being: From Distinguishing Distinctions to Ethics will be presented. \nLiving beings are distinguishing distinctions. Single cells and multicellular organisms maintain themselves distinct by drawing distinctions. This is what organisms are and what they do. From this starting point\, key issues examined range across ontology\, epistemology\, phenomenology\, logic\, and ethics. Topics discussed include the origin of life\, the nature and purpose of biology\, the relation between life and logic\, the nature and limits of formal logic\, the nature of subjects\, the subject-object relation\, subject-subject relationships and the deep roots of ethics. The book provides a radical new foundation to think about philosophy and biology and appeals to researchers and students in these fields. It powerfully debunks mechanical thinking about living beings and shows the vast reservoir of insights into aliveness available in the arts and humanities.
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/mayer-foulkes/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T113000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T120000
DTSTAMP:20230727T183853Z
CREATED:20230624T090504Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230727T183853Z
UID:1439-1690803000-1690804800@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Coffee break
DESCRIPTION:
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/coffee-break/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T110000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T113000
DTSTAMP:20231029T092458Z
CREATED:20230624T090501Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231029T092458Z
UID:1438-1690801200-1690803000@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Jamin Pelkey
DESCRIPTION:Wonder and Embodiment: On Hoffmeyer’s biosemiotic aesthetics\nJamin Pelkey\nAmong the many ideas earmarked for ongoing development in Jesper Hoffmeyer’s oeuvre\, his sketches of a biosemiotic aesthetics are among the most promising for dispelling pernicious illusions of alienation between human consciousness and the natural world and for healing the untold trauma these illusions have caused. Building on ideas from C. S. Peirce\, John Deely\, Mary Douglas\, Kalevi Kull\, Mark Johnson\, and others (esp.\, Weber 2016)\, I focus on three themes in Hoffmeyer’s writings related to biosemiotic aesthetics (esp.\, 1997\, 2008): (1) his discussions of the interrelationships between aesthetics and ethics\, (2) his treatment of consciousness as narrative and spatial interpretation\, and (3) his embrace of fallibility and ambiguity as necessary for the emergence of signs of meaning in the universe. In doing so\, I suggest that wonder and embodiment are key unifying relations between these three themes\, with a special emphasis on the lived feelings of bodily movement and memory schemas in relation to the earth. To better illustrate the pragmatic power of these ideas\, I then shift to cognitive poetic analyses of four brief passages of literary art concerned with the ethics and aesthetics of human relationships to the biological world. These four passages (by Cameron Awkward-Rich\, Edna St. Vincent Millay\, Herman Melville\, and Cormac McCarthy\, respectively) illustrate ways in which movement schemas of the human Umwelt oriented to the bodily midlines of upright posture are well-suited for rehabilitating attention to an ethical aesthetics of empathic wonder capable of retrieving a vital sense of continuity with life itself\, including a spontaneous sense of concern for its irreplaceability. Revitalizing attention to these layers of being is a necessary but neglected component of the regimen required for healing the trauma of induced alienation between modern modes of human consciousness and the natural world. \n  \nReferences \nHoffmeyer\, J. (1997). Signs of Meaning in the Universe. Indiana University Press. \nHoffmeyer\, J. (2008). Biosemiotics: An Examination into the Signs of Life and the Life of Signs. University of Scranton Press. \nWeber\, A. (2016). The Biology of Wonder: Aliveness\, Feeling and the Metamorphosis of Science. New Society Publishers. \n[Slides from the presentation]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/pelkey/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T103000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T110000
DTSTAMP:20231029T092502Z
CREATED:20230624T090501Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20231029T092502Z
UID:1437-1690799400-1690801200@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Paul Deshusses
DESCRIPTION:Sebeok’s Razor and the Sign of Three: Hoffmeyer\, Chomsky and Mandelbrot\nPaul Deshusses\n  \nThis presentation will be based on historical archival research conducted at the Thomas Sebeok Archive in Bloomington Indiana\, and will review four emblematic and revealing correspondence the researcher held. Sebeok’s three chosen interlocutors for this presentation are Jesper Hoffmeyer\, Benoît Mandelbrot\, and Noam Chomsky. The ‘decisive’ correspondence the scholar had with Jesper Hoffmeyer in the 1990s will be reviewed\, as well as the forgotten exchange of letters he had with Benoît Mandelbrot in 1961\, 20 years before the mathematician developed the field of fractal theory and\, finally\, the correspondence he held with Noam Chomsky in the seventies where the principle of the Occam Razor and ironies were very present. Each correspondence will enable me to argue something larger about the history of biosemiotics\, namely the role of political and economic context\, serendipity\, and the role of forgotten actors or ‘little hands’ of science.\nFirst\, the content of the correspondence will be analysed\, and more importantly\, the form and the tone\, as theorised by the meta-historian Hayden White. Moreover\, this presentation seeks to illuminate not just the intellectual context and debates in which the actors were swimming (and sometimes against the current) but also will devote time and attention to excavating the political and economic contexts\, which no doubt played their part in the successes and challenges the actors met. On the context side\, I will\, for instance\, mention the evident role of cold war politics but also stress the role Sebeok’s academic secretaries played in his career (their assigned tasks far-exceeding their academic roles when requested to buy him a razor or deal with after-sales service for Christmas gifts for his children\, to mention two examples). For the style analysis part\, I will highlight the role of apologies in Thomas Sebeok’s prose\, irony\, and ‘awe’ vocabulary. Therefore\, following a similar method\, I strive to uncover the particular aesthetics and creative aspirations encoded in the various speakers’ self-imagination and expression\, most notably Jesper Hoffmeyer.\nFinally\, this presentation will ponder if Thomas Sebeok theory and Jesper Hoffmeyer theory of semiosis can be applied to their own method of working as revealed by the archive. Drawing on their own insights\, the correspondence analysis may serve as a compelling example of how semiotic theory can shed light on its ‘birth’ as a field of interest. Furthermore\, Sebeok\, Hoffmeyer\, Chomsky\, and Mandelbrot’s letters reveal a rich interplay between language\, posture\, and broader political and economic context\, illustrating the complexity of the semiotic process they were subjected to\, while theorising it in their own way. By applying their own insights to their exchange\, after having preliminary reviewed their posts following a method developed by Hayden White\, this paper seeks to contribute to the ongoing project of building a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the epistemology of early biosemiotics inquiries. \n[Slides from the presentation]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/deshusses/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T103000
DTSTAMP:20230809T214457Z
CREATED:20230624T090500Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230809T214457Z
UID:1435-1690797600-1690799400@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Claus Emmeche & Kalevi Kull
DESCRIPTION:Opening remarks\n[Slides from the presentation]
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/opening-remarks-emmeche-kull/
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230731T000000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Vienna:20230804T235959
DTSTAMP:20230727T183952Z
CREATED:20230624T085708Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20230727T183952Z
UID:1423-1690761600-1691193599@isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com
SUMMARY:Gatherings in Biosemiotics 2023
DESCRIPTION:Program information for the Gatherings in Biosemiotics 2023.\nYou can review the presentation schedule for this year’s Gatherings starting from here.
URL:https://isbsarchive.dreamhosters.com/gibs23pres/gatherings-in-biosemiotics-2023/
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR