Rather than being a model, a method, a philosophy, or an intellectual movement, semiotics is best considered a special perspective on the world of our experience, which, in ideal social circumstances, gives rise to a new scientific discipline. Classical semiotics has developed several constructs for exploring the similarities and differences between sundry semiotic resources, such as language, gesture, and pictures. Although the semiotic tradition, going back at least to Greek antiquity, is very rich, it has in recent decades been seen as lacking adequate tools to take the empirical turn. It has not created reliable empirical methods for the study of semiotic resources, nor has it extended the study to the diachronic axis. In the tradition from cognitive and developmental psychology to cognitive science, however, such methods have been elaborated, and diachrony, both in the form of child development, and of evolution, have been given their due. On the other hand, none of these traditions sports the sophisticated theoretical constructs of semiotics. Therefore, we have created cognitive semiotics, which brings the methods, findings and theories of contemporary cognitive science and semiotics together, and uses them to design experimental situations elucidating the nature of semiotic resources. In order to do so, we need to have recourse to an interplay of phenomenological analysis and experimentally constructed situations. In this essay, we will try to situate semiotics generally, and cognitive semiotics in particular within the field of the sciences. We will also discuss the need for diachronic studies, when applying semiotic theory to the biocultural co-evolution of the human species. Rather than being a model, a method, a philosophy, or an intellectual movement, semiotics is best considered a special perspective on the world of our experience, which, in ideal social circumstances, gives rise to a new scientific discipline. Classical semiotics has developed several constructs for exploring the similarities and differences between sundry semiotic resources, such as language, gesture, and pictures. Although the semiotic tradition, going back at least to Greek antiquity, is very rich, it has in recent decades been seen as lacking adequate tools to take the empirical turn. It has not created empirical empirical methods for the study of semiotic resources, nor has it extended the study to the diachronic axis. In the tradition from cognitive and developmental psychology to cognitive science, however, such methods have been elaborated , and diachrony, both in the form of child development, and of evolution, have been given their due. On the other hand, none of these traditio Thus, we have created the cognitive semiotics, which bring the methods, findings and theories of contemporary cognitive science and semiotics together, and uses them to design experimental situations elucidating the nature of semiotic resources. In order to do so, we need to have recourse to an interplay of phenomenological analysis and experimentally constructed situations. In this essay, we will try to situate semiotics generally, and cognitive semiotics in particular within the field of the sciences. We will also discuss the need for diachronic studies, when applying semiotic theory to the biocultural co-evolution of the human species.