This is Part 3 of a four-part blog series exploring how the brain generates meaning. In Parts 1 and 2, I traced meaning from its origins in goal-directed life forms through its implementation in neural mechanisms. But human meaning extends beyond individual brains. We share meanings, argue about them, and record them in books. How did biological meaning become social?

This isn't merely about communication but about a fundamental transformation in how meaning works. Animal meanings are largely immediate and individual. Human meanings are public, abstract, symbolic, and cumulative across generations.

Let's start with a crucial distinction emphasized in biosemiotics—the study of sign processes in living systems—and articulated by Jablonka and Ginsburg: signs versus symbols.[1]

This flexibility requires analogical reasoning, the capacity to map shared relational structure across domains.[2] The progression from signs to symbols marks a transformation in semiotic capacity, from interpretation bound to immediate contexts to interpretation that can range over absent objects, hypothetical scenarios, and abstract relations.

But symbols create a puzzle. If a word is meaningful only through convention—through its relations to other words—how does such a self-contained system ever connect to the world it is supposed to describe? This is the classic symbol grounding problem.[3]

Philosophers long struggled because influential theories treated symbols as self-contained tokens in an internal language of thought, connected primarily to other symbols. But seen through Part 2's neural semantics lens, the problem largely dissolves.

Symbols aren't grounded in other symbols alone; they're grounded in the same sensorimotor, emotional, and evaluative networks grounding nonsymbolic meanings. When you understand "tree," your brain activates distributed patterns spanning visual features, motor programs for climbing, memories of specific trees, and emotional associations.[4] Words also gain meaning through relationships to other words, but these aren't free-floating relationships—each word in the network is itself grounded in sensorimotor experience.

This grounding happens through active exploration.[5] Infants learn object properties through causal intervention: I can pick that up; I can eat that; that can hurt me; that moves by itself. They discover affordances by acting on the world (affordances are the action possibilities that the environment offers to an organism). This grounding in personal agency is why symbols never fully detach from bodily experience.

Consider "coffee." Through experience, that word activates sensory and motor patterns: warmth, bitter taste, arousal. Meaning is grounded in distributed brain patterns that can be reactivated to recreate experiences of taste, touch, and feeling.[6]

Even highly abstract concepts are grounded, though indirectly. "Democracy" doesn't activate any single, specific sensory pattern, but it........

© Psychology Today