I agree with Cassirer when he says that, myth, art, language and science appear as symbols; not in the sense of mere figures which refer to some given reality by means of suggestion and allegorical . . . in the sense of forces each of which produces and posits a world of its own. (p. 8).
Cassirer believed that human beings were superior of all symbolizing animals. Our achievements, science, religion, arts, history, political thought, religion, language - they all are unique parts of our evolutionary process and help us to understand our experience and the world. He believes that these symbolic forms are not imitations, but organs of reality.
His symbolic forms both exist in the world as the evolving frames of human experience. He took the special case of language, Cassirer finds that the question as to its genesis has proved a "veritable monkey puzzle" (pp. 23-31).
On the one hand, it has become obvious that an adequate account of the genesis of language cannot begin with the symbolic forms characteristic of theoretical cognition.
Montage of languages. Prototype header for the lan...
Illustration of Naive realism or Direct realism.
English: Ernst Cassirer (1874-1945)Even the most basic distinction between name and class term requires a genetic account. On the other hand, some explanations as have been offered have been rooted in naive realism, in the notion that structure
and classification and features of the world that need only be noticed and reflected in language. With the adoption of the critical standpoint, these explanations wither away.
I agree with this point Cassirer is making. I believe when Cassirer says that myth, art, language and science appear as symbols; not in the sense of mere figures which refer to some given reality by means of suggestion and allegorical . . . in the sense of forces each of which produces and posits a world of its own. He means...