Bodies and the things we adorn them with have meaning. In this talk I will argue that such communication is best understood as a branch of philosophy of language and in particular\, within a Gricean theory of meaning. This argument begins with discussion of a previous study of meaning in bodily adornment undertaken by Roland Barthes working in the Saussurean\, semiotic tradition. I argue that Barthes&rsquo\; attempt fails for the same reason many theories of linguistic meaning failed: they treat meaning as the result of a system of codes &ndash\; an assumption that leads to theories that can never fully explain communication. I take Barthes&rsquo\; attempt as an indication that dress should be treated instead as a fundamentally Gricean\, intentional process\, with meaning first delineated into Grice&rsquo\;s categories of natural and non-natural meaning\, as well as a new category I will introduce: &lsquo\;imitation of natural meaning.&rsquo\; I present specific cases to show how these categories apply to meaning in dress. In the course of this argument I will also defend Gricean intentionalism from a number of objections.
\nPlease email \;Jamie Perez-Galvan (jperezgalvan@unr.edu) to request the meeting passcode.
ORGANIZER;CN=Benjamin D. Young: METHOD:PUBLISH END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR