Symbol as cognitive tool of mental activity

Abstract

There is no unanimous definition of the term symbol. Researchers note that in scientific studies on signs and symbols the latter are often defined in terms of their types, such as indexes, images, schemes, allegories, metaphors and so on (Losev, 1976, De Loache, 1991, Zinchenko, 2010) and the widespread use of the tools expression disregards the distinction between sign and symbols. At the same time there is long-established philosophic and psychological tradition of viewing symbol as separate cognitive tool, with which we concur in our consideration of the distinction between sign and symbol to be effective.The notion of symbolIn the works of Gadamer (1975), Hegel (1977, 1969), Schelling (1936) and other researchers sign and symbol were set in opposition. Our research focuses on the cognitive aspect of symbol usage, which we find in the classic discrimination between sign and symbol by Hegel (1977, 1969). Hegel pointed out that symbol is a certain viewing with an essence and meaning that is more or less corresponding to the essence and meaning of the object it refers to; on the other hand, when it comes to the sign and its nature, the essence and the meaning of viewing and the ones of the object it refers to have nothing in (Hegel, 1977, p. 294-295).The nature of the sign representation is such that it directs one immediately to the meaning of the signified, not taking, in sense, the of the into consideration. In contrast, orientation with respect to symbol is happening within the boundaries of the external features of situation, and those features, including the connections between its elements, when manipulated with, become meanings.Another characteristic feature of symbol is the way in which it appears -- symbolic mediation occurs in of uncertainty, when the objective and the ways of reaching it are unknown: has external features, but its internal structural interrelations are hidden. Therefore sign refers to the signified meaning or set of meanings directly, whereas symbolic image has no connection to certain meanings. We believe that of uncertainty is structural element of symbol, and understanding the latter implies operation with or movement within its external features (Mamardashvili, Pyatigorsky, 1997). According to Mamardashvili, Pyatigorsky, symbol indicates something unknown at the present moment, in other words -- it performs signal function.As Eliade (1991) points out, myths and ritual forms of actions (which according to Losev (1976) and other researchers are the most vivid examples of symbolical cognition) make border situations conceivable for human and for humanity. A border is situation in which humans recognize their place in the world, in other words -- the need for orientation. This viewpoint is also expressed in the works of Jung (1998) who discovered peculiarity of symbol actualization -- it happens when one's customary means of orientation cease to be effective.Symbolization development in ontogenesisAccording to Piaget (1969, 1971), who in his works paid special attention to the development of symbolic (semiotic) function, symbol becomes part of children's cognitive activity at the age of two years. Piaget's understanding of symbol is that symbol is the signifier, though having similarities with, essentially stands apart from the signified. Therefore in Piaget's opinion, the figurative (related to external features) element of thinking appears to be symbolic when an image is used for assimilation of some content. Piaget considered symbolic representation to be common in situations characterized by gap between speech and action. That is why some researchers (Schmid-Kitsikis, 1987) note that symbolization is employed only in situations where children manifest it.To exemplify symbolization, let's consider the when child sees their father shaving and then, in manner of their father, runs their own hand up and down their face to understand the meaning of their father's actions through their own movements. …