Startseite How Cassirer explains myth and other symbolic forms through semiotic functions
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

How Cassirer explains myth and other symbolic forms through semiotic functions

  • Masoud Algooneh Juenghani EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 27. Februar 2020

Abstract

Ernst Cassirer (1874–1945), Neo-Kantian philosopher of Marburg school, studies myth as a component of symbolic forms. He considers myth as the cornerstone of philosophy of culture as well as the source of such other forms as language, religion, art and science. Cassirer, applying an epistemological approach towards myths and other realms of human culture, argues that human beings experience the world through a mediated process. Of course, this mediated encounter with the world has different aspects in the evolving course of culture. These aspects are completely dependent upon the symbolic form through which man experiences his world. However, it seems what Cassirer puts forth as an explanation of the cultural evolution of mankind is basically influenced by his semiotic viewpoints. Therefore, the present article tries to find the theoretical resources of Cassirer’s thought and analyze his reasoning in this regard. Emphasizing Cassirer’s theoretical assumptions as well as his methodology, we have tried to better understand his claims about myth and other symbolic forms. It has been revealed that Cassirer’s theory is mainly shaped by his particular models of semiotic functions. Analyzing the semiotic functions of each specific form indicates that Cassirer has differentiated three independent functions. Each of these functions works on an expressive, [1] representative, [2] or signifying [3] basis and is respectively correspondent with myth, language, and science.

References

Apel, Karl-Otto. 1973. Towards a transformation of philosophy, Glyn Adey & David Fisby (trans.). Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Barash, Jeffrey Andrew. 2011. Myth in history, philosophy of history as myth: On the ambivalence of Hans Blumenberg’s interpretation of Ernst Cassirer’s theory of myth. History and Theory 50. 328–340.10.1111/j.1468-2303.2011.00588.xSuche in Google Scholar

Cassirer, Ernst. 1946. The myth of the state. New Haven: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Cassirer, Ernst. 1955. Philosophy of symbolic forms, vol II: Mythical thought, Ralph Manheim (trans.), Charles W. Hendel (ed.). New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Cassirer, Ernst. 1980. Philosophy of symbolic forms, vol. I: Language, Ralph Manheim (trans.), Charles W. Hendel (ed.). New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Cassirer, Ernst. 1988. Zabān va ostore, [Language and myth], Mohsen Thalâthi (trans.). Tehran: Noqre Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Cassirer, Ernst. 1994. Resāle-i dar bāb-e Ensān, [An essay on man], Bozorg Naderzâdeh (trans.). Tehran: The Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies.Suche in Google Scholar

Coskun, Deniz. 2007. Law as symbolic form: Ernst Cassirer and the anthropocentric view of law. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-6256-8Suche in Google Scholar

Frazer, James George. 2009. The golden bough: A study of magic and religion. Auckland: The Floating Press.10.1093/owc/9780199538829.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Friedman, Michael. 2000. A parting of the ways: Carnap, Cassirer, and Heidegger. Chicago & La Salle: Carus.Suche in Google Scholar

Habermas, Jürgen. 1971. Knowledge and human interests, J.J. Shapiro (trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Hamburg, Carl H. 1956. Symbol and reality: Studies in the philosophy of Ernst Cassirer. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.10.1007/978-94-011-9461-7Suche in Google Scholar

Haqi, Ali. 2010. The role of the myth in history. The History and Geography Book of the Month 149. 8–11.Suche in Google Scholar

Hoel, Aud Sissel. 2011. Thinking “difference” differently: Cassirer versus Derrida on symbolic mediation. Synthese 179. 75–91.10.1007/s11229-009-9629-2Suche in Google Scholar

Ja’fari, Hassan. 2009. Religion and myth: A study of Ernest Cassirer’s theory of the myth. Religion Research 6. 5–27.Suche in Google Scholar

Keller, Pierre. 2015. Cassirer’s retrieval of Kant’s Copernican revolution in semiotics. In J. Tyler Friedman & Sebastian Luft (eds.), The philosophy of Ernst Cassirer, 259–288. Berlin & Boston: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110421811-011Suche in Google Scholar

Levy-Bruhl, Lucien. 2010 [1910]. Kārkard-e Zehn dar Djavāme-e Aqabmandeh, [How natives think], Yadollâh Moughen (trans.). Tehran: Hermes.Suche in Google Scholar

Mehregan, Arvin. 2013. Philosophy of semiotics. Isfahan: Fardâ.Suche in Google Scholar

Meletinsky, Eleazar M. 2000. The poetics of myth. New York & London: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar

Mesqari, Ali-Akbar A. & Vahid Qâsemi. 2011. The origin of myth in the primitive form of perception. Philosophical Researches 8. 191–236.Suche in Google Scholar

Montagu, M. F. Ashley. 1949. Cassirer on mythological thinking. In Paul Arthur Schilpp (ed.), The philosophy of Ernst Cassirer, 359–377. La Salle, IL: Open Court.Suche in Google Scholar

Motzkin, Gabriel. 2008. Cassirer’s philosophy of symbolic forms: A foundational reading. In Jeffrey Andrew Barash (ed.), The symbolic construction of reality, 73–93. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago.10.7208/chicago/9780226036892.003.0004Suche in Google Scholar

Moughen, Yadollâh. 1999. The mythical thought form. In Yadollâh Moughen (ed.), Language, thought and culture, 193–219. Tehran: Hermes.Suche in Google Scholar

Moughen, Yadollâh. 2010a. Ernest Cassirer: Philosopher of culture. Tehran: Office of Cultural Research.Suche in Google Scholar

Moughen, Yadollâh. 2010b. Levy-Bruhl and the problem of mentality. Tehran: Office of Cultural Studies.Suche in Google Scholar

Renz, Ursula. 2011. From philosophy to criticism of myth: Cassirer’s concept of myth. Synthese 179. 135–152.10.1007/s11229-009-9624-7Suche in Google Scholar

Rotenstreich, Nathan. 1952. Cassirer’s philosophy of symbolic forms and the problem of history. Theoria 18(3). 155–173.10.1111/j.1755-2567.1952.tb00913.xSuche in Google Scholar

Segal, Robert A. 2004. Myth: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University.10.1093/actrade/9780198724704.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Skidelsky, Edward. 2008. Ernst Cassirer: The last philosopher of culture. Princeton: Princeton University.10.1515/9781400828944Suche in Google Scholar

Sperber, Dan. 1979. Rethinking symbolism, Alice L. Morton (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University.Suche in Google Scholar

Sulokor, Harry. 1995. Art and literature in the thought of Ernest Cassirer: Functional approach, Amir-Hossein Ranjbar (trans.). Art Journal 28. 60–78.Suche in Google Scholar

Tsag, Gerhilde. 1999. The return of myth: A plan for the education of the myth of the state, Mohammad-Reza Nikfar (trans.). Negâh-e Now 40. 77–90.Suche in Google Scholar

Verene, Donald Phillip. 1969. Kant, Hegel, and Cassirer: The origins of the philosophy of symbolic forms. Journal of the History of Ideas 30(1). 33–46.10.2307/2708243Suche in Google Scholar

Verene, Donald Phillip. 1987. Cassirer. In Lindsay Jones (ed.), Encyclopedia of religion, vol. 3. 1448–1450. New York: Scribner.Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-02-27
Published in Print: 2020-03-26

© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 19.11.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/sem-2018-0074/pdf?lang=de
Button zum nach oben scrollen