Figure 1. A schematic depiction of the logic of symbolic relationships in terms of their component indexical infrastructure. Arrows depict indexical relationships and letters depict symbol tokens (Ss) and objects of reference (Os). Downward directed arrows represent the interrupted transitive indexical relationship between symbol tokens and their typically correlated objects of reference. The upper arrows point to loci in the semantic space that has been virtually constructed by token–token relationships (depicted by the horizontal system of arrows). If the symbolic reference is simple (not combinatorial), indexical reference continues from there down to a given instance of a typical object. Otherwise this referential arrow should originate from an intermediate position in the semantic space (determined by a sort of vector summation of the relationship of the combined symbols) to some other position in the object space. Upward arrows depict an extrapolated correspondence between physical relationships and se-mantic relationships on which this extrapolative and indirect mode of reference depends for its pragmatic fit to the world (text and figure reprinted from Deacon, 2003b).

Figure 2. Arthur Koestler's way of depicting the bisociation of "planes" or "matrices" of ideas (roughly equivalent to schemas or cognitive spaces) in which two conceptual systems are either: 1. reversed so one is undermined (jokes, humor, irony), 2. fused into a new larger synthesis (scientific discovery), or 3. juxtaposed to illuminate oppositions, tensions, symmetries, paradoxes, etc. (ritual, arts). The lines traced on each plane reflect parallel inferential or narrative "moves" on which the bisociation will be based. A sudden discovery of the existence of a bisociative possibility (e.g. in a eureka experience) is depicted by the tiny explosion cartoon indicated by the arrow, though the suddenness or single point mapping is not intrinsic to the general model.

Figure 3. This figure follows the depiction logic of cognitive blend theory (lower half: cloud = contributing spaces, and lower oval = blended space) but introduces the additional depiction of the correlated emotional "spaces" of each contributing space (jagged shapes). The network/matrix structure of the emotional spaces need not be in any way correlated with one another as are the conceptual spaces. Emotional spaces are thus depicted as juxtaposed but not integrated in the background of the fused blended conceptual space.

Figure 4. The blend-like structure of jokes. Following the diagrammatic conventions of figure 3, conceptual spaces are cloud-like or oval and emotional spaces are jagged. Humor begins on one presumed conceptual frame (depicted as a dark cloud) and then executes a shift to a different and conventionally unlikely parallel frame of interpretation (depicted as a light cloud). The blend is achieved by some trivial mapping of phonology (as in a pun) or semantics (circles) but inverts the weakly activated in background attention (depicted as the light cloud; probably a predominantly right hemisphere activity). In the bait-and-switch blend of the joke this conceptual and attentional relationship is reversed and an unlikely background frame is indicated. Correlatively, there is also a shift in arousal commitment from one correlated emotional frame to another (usually from a more socially loaded to a less loaded one; here indicated by the deflation of one and inflation of another emotional state), which triggers the rapid transfer of attention and arousal.

Figure 5. The blend structure of aesthetic experiences. Using the same conventions of depiction as Figure 3 and 4 this figure depicts the difference between humor and art as an incompletely irresolvable juxtaposition where the cognitive blend relationship creating the conceptual juxtaposition and a correlated juxtaposition of correlated emotional spaces remains in flux. This is depicted as dynamically alternating emotional schemas, often in conflict with one another.

Figure 6. A very tentative map of the interrelationships of some emergent emotional forms. This represents an elaboration of a chart from Koestler (1964) in which he links humor, science, and art in a continuum. Here I have interdigitated his with other domains of emergent cognition-emotion. This diagram collapses a multidimensional space of possible relationships to depict these relationships with respect how they map onto four dimensions of semiotic and psychological functions. These are inferential effect, affective value, and communicative intent (dimensions depicted below) as well as the dynamic development of the bisociative-blending process (depicted above).