UDC: 141; 18; 7.01
https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2026-3-123
EDN: YHYOZW


viewing

SYMBOLIC UNIVERSE OF E. CASSIRER IN MYTH-MAKING AND AESTHETIC REFLECTION

G. G. Kolomiets
Orenburg State University named after V.A. Bondarenko, Orenburg, Russia
e-mail: kolomietsgg@yandex.ru

Abstract. The article emphasizes the relevance of Cassirer’s concept of symbolic forms for modern scientific and philosophical knowledge, highlighting the connection between rationalist and irrationalist approaches in myth-making and aesthetic reflection as a method of philosophical discourse. By addressing the concept of reflection, the author follows an anthroposociological and comparative analysis methodology, presenting Cassirer’s ideas about the symbolic universe in light of their own interpretation of aesthetic epistemology and the philosophy of mythology by V. M. Naidysh. The aim is to show the interaction of the philosophy of symbolism, the philosophy of myth-making and aesthetics as a philosophical science. The purpose of the article is to demonstrate the connection between the symbolic, mythological and aesthetic attitudes of man to reality, to substantiate the aesthetic and epistemological ability of human consciousness, including aystesis, when considering the symbolic universe of E. Cassirer. In the introduction, the concept of reflection is outlined, and the reasons for referring to the topic of the article are indicated. In the main part, following Naidysh’s reasoning about myth as a symbolic form, the author presents a post- Kassirerian aesthetic reflection. The article examines symbolic forms that are characterized by a deep aesthetic principle of sensory aisthesis, which is a necessary condition for the construction of symbolic forms, their functions, and relationships in the unified metasystem of science and art. For aesthetic epistemology, it is important that Cassirer’s principle of symbolism is universal, significant, and universally applicable, solving the problems of «spirit» and «life» through «symbolic function», «symbolic relationship», and «meaning», which provide for human cultural and historical development. Symbolic forms of myth-making, everyday language, and art, as well as science, have various types in the open cultural process. The author’s post-Kantian aesthetic reflection defines his perspective on the symbolic nature of art. A different approach to the essence of the symbol and its role in A. F. Losev’s expressive forms is outlined. The novelty of the author’s aesthetic reflection lies in the fact that the author focuses not so much on art as a symbolic form, but rather on aisthesis as the deep source of symbolic thinking. As a result of the study, the main idea is highlighted that the symbolic universe is associated with the expanding civilizational and historical-cultural development, the expansion of the «body of civilization» through creative human activity. This encourages new myth-making and enhances the sensory and aesthetic perception of the complex symbolism in the meta-system of art and science. In conclusion, the value of both the symbolic and the aesthetic in the active functioning of human consciousness is highlighted. The article confirms the interconnectedness and unity of symbol and aisthesis, as well as the significance of the aesthetic in the creation of symbolic forms that encompass sensory and intellectual intuitions, irrationality, and the unconscious. According to Cassirer’s reflection, the symbolic universe lives and grows in the deep foundation of consciousness, acquiring new features in all types of symbolic forms that require further consideration.

Key words: philosophy of symbolic forms, Ernst Cassirer, philosophy of myth-making, aisthesis, aesthetic epistemology, reflection.

Cite as: Kolomiets, G. G. (2026) [Symbolic universe of E. Cassirer in myth-making and aesthetic reflection]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. Vol. 3, pp. 123–135. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2026-3-123.


References

  1. Basin, E. Ya. (2012) Semanticheskaya filosofiya iskusstva [Neo-Kantian Aesthetics of Symbolic Forms: E. Cassirer] M.: Humanitarian, 348 p. (In Russ.).
  2. Baumgarten, A. G. (2021) Estetika [Aesthetics]. Moscow: Russian Foundation for Assistance to Education and Science. Dmitry Pozharsky University Publishing House, 760 p.
  3. Belov, V. N. (2025) [What is Neo-Kantianism]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. No. 1, pp. 11–26. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2025-1-11. (In Russ.).
  4. Gilbert, K., Kuhn, G. (2000) Istoriya estetiki [History of Aesthetics]. Vol. 2. 2nd ed. Moscow: Progress Publishing Group, 316 p. (In Russ., transl. from Eng.).
  5. Gulyga, A. (2000) Estetika v svete aksiologii. Pyat’desyat let na Volkhonke. Nauchnoye izdaniye [Aesthetics in the Light of Axiology. Fifty Years on Volkhonka]. Scientific Edition. St. Petersburg: Aleteya, 447 p.
  6. Kagan, M. S. (1997) Estetika kak filosofskaya nauka [Aesthetics as a Philosophical Science]. Saint Petersburg: Petropolis, 544 p.
  7. Cassirer, E. (1998) Izbrannoye. Opyt o cheloveke [Selected Works. An Essay on Man]. Moscow: Gardarika, 779 p.
  8. Cassirer, E. (2000) [The Concept of Symbolic Form in the Structure of the Sciences of the Spirit]. Izbrannoye : individ i kosmos [Selected Works: Individual and Cosmos]. St. Petersburg: University Book, p. 394. (In Russ.).
  9. Cassirer, E. (2002) Filosofiya simvolicheskikh form [Philosophy of Symbolic Forms]. Vol. 1. Language. Moscow; St. Petersburg: Un. Book, p. 20.
  10. Cassirer, E. (2002) Filosofiya simvolicheskikh form [The philosophy of symbolic forms]. Vol. 2. Mythological thinking. M.; St. Petersburg: University Book, 280 p.
  11. Cassirer, E. (2002) Filosofiya simvolicheskikh form [Philosophy of Symbolic Forms]. Vol. 3 Phenomenology of Cognition Moscow; St. Petersburg: University Book, p. 86.
  12. Kogen, G. (2002) [Aesthetics of Pure Feeling (Fragments from Volume I: Foundations of Systemic Aesthetics)]. Sovremennaya zapadno-yevropeyskaya i amerikanskaya estetika: Sbornik perevodov [Modern Western European and American Aesthetics: Collection of Translations]. Moscow: Book House «University», p. 54–60. (In Russ., transl .from Engl.).
  13. Kolomiets, G. G. (2026) [Russian neo-Kantian philosophy of music in the early 20th century in the context of symbolic forms]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. No. 1, pp. 106–118. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2026-1-106. (In Russ.).
  14. Kolomiets, G. G. (2025) [Symbolic Philosophy of Art in the Context of Anthropology and Intercultural Interaction: Russia, China, Europe]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. No. 1, pp. 129–139. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2025-1-129. (In Russ.).
  15. Kolomiets, G. G. (2025) [Aesthetics and Aesthetic Epistemology as a Subject of the Theory of Knowledge and the Field of Engineering]. Vestnik Samarskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya [Bulletin of the Samara State Technical University. Series «Philosophy»]. Vol. 7. No. 3, pp. 48–57. (In Russ.).
  16. Kolomiets, G. G. (2020) [Aesthetics as a philosophical science: rethinking of the ideas Baumgarten’s ideas]. Intellekt. Innovacii. Investicii [Intellect. Innovations. Investments]. No. 4, рр. 61–69. – https://doi.org/10.25198/2077-7175-2020-4-61. (In Russ.).
  17. Kolomiets, G. G. (2024) [Art and Science as a Subject of Aesthetic Epistemology]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Filosofiya [Bulletin of Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series: Philosophy]. Vol. 28. No. 3, pp. 796–810. – https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2302-2024-28-3-796-810. (In Russ.).
  18. Langer, S. (2000) Filosofiya v novom klyuche: Issledovaniye simvoliki razuma, rituala i iskusstva [Philosophy in a New Key: A Study of the Symbolism of Reason, Ritual, and Art]. M.: Republic, 287 p. (In Russ., transl. from Eng.).
  19. Losev, A. F. (1999) [Dialectics of Myth]. Samoye samo: Sochineniya [The Most Self: Works]. Moscow: ZAO Publish.house: EKSMO-Press, pp. 205–404. (In Russ.).
  20. Losev, A. F. (1999) Mif – razvernutoye magicheskoye imya [Myth – magic name expanded]. Moscow: ZAO Publish.house: EKSMO-Press, pp. 405–422. (In Russ.).
  21. Losev, A. F. (1999) [Philosophy of the name]. Samoye samo: Sochineniya [The Most Self: Works]. Moscow: ZAO Publish.house: EKSMO-Press, pp. 19–204. (In Russ.).
  22. Naidysh, V. M. (2004) Filosofiya mifologii. XIX – nachalo XXI v. [Philosophy of Mythology. XIX – Early XXI Centuries]. Moscow: Alfa-M, 544 p. (In Russ.).
  23. Stepin, V. S. (2011) Tsivilizatsiya i kul’tura [Civilization and culture]. St. Petersburg: SPbGUP, 408 p. (In Russ.).
  24. Stolovich, L. N. (1994) Krasota. Dobro. Istina. Ocherk istorii esteticheskoy aksiologii [Beauty. Goodness. Truth. An essay on the history of aesthetic axiology]. Moscow : Republic Publ., 464 p.
  25. Strelnik, O. N. (2005) [E. Cassirer on the Relationship between Myth and Language]. Vestnik Rossiyskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Filosofiya [Bulletin of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series: Philosophy]. No. 1, pp. 157–175. (In Russ.).
  26. Cassirer, E. (1979) Symbol, Myth, and Culture. Essays and Lectures, 304 p. (In Eng.).

In order for us to provide you with high-quality services, we use cookies that are stored on your computer (location information; ip-address; type, language, OS and browser version; device type and screen resolution; source from which you came to site the user; what pages the user opens and what buttons the user clicks; the same information is used to process statistical data on the use of the site through the Yandex.Metrika Internet service). By clicking the "I agree" button, you confirm that you are informed about the use of cookies on our website. You can disable cookies in your browser settings.