Cassirer's Philosophy Research Articles

Democracy and the Symbolic Constitution of Society

Building on Cassirer's philosophy of symbolic forms, this paper argues that the continuities and discontinuities characterizing the passage from medieval politics to modern democracy can best be understood by reference to political power's symbolic structure. For the one, political power, whether theocratic or democratic, always mediates an absolute power; as mediation, political power enacts the twofold movement which Cassirer has identified as characteristic of all human symbolization: a distancing of, and approximation to, reality. For the other, democracy institutionalizes a category distinction between meaning and being, making of political unity a functional, rather than substantial, unity.

Ernst Cassirer (review)

626 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 34:4 OCTOBER 1996 and on the particular topic at hand. All in all, I find this study a major contribution to Machadiana, valuable for both those familiar with his work and for those who will be goaded into familiarity by this book. My only regret is that Mr. Maia Neto did not relax his criterion a bit and include a detailed analysis of Quincas Borba along with the other novels. Even though it does not fit his limitation to protagonist-narrator, I think that there is a great deal of material in the novel that falls within the purview of his study. GREGORY RABASSA Queens Collegeand the Graduate School, CUNY Andreas Graeser. Ernst Cassirer. Beck'sche Reihe: Denker. Mtinchen: Verlag C. H. Beck, 1994. Pp. ~34. Paper, DM 94.oo. This book is the first full-length critical study of Ernst Cassirer's philosophy to appear in his native language of German not to have originated as a doctoral thesis or to aim at "introducing" Cassirer's thought. Graeser, a professor of philosophy in Bern, Switzerland , was trained in ancient philosophy and has published numerous studies dealing with Hegel and different fields of contemporary philosophy. His book does not concentrate on summarizing or reformulating Cassirer's position but rather seeks to assess it in the light of contemporary philosophical debate. Graeser does not treat Cassirer as the member of a philosophical school but rather looks at his thought in reference to the analytic and hermeneutic streams of contemporary philosophy. Frege and Heidegger play as large a role in this study as do Kant and Hegel. By comparing problems discussed in Cassirer's writings with Frege's or Heidegger's views and incorporating them into his argument, Graeser shows how the different levels of Cassirer's theory of symbolic forms address the questions of thinkers whose thought at first glance seems fundamentally different from his. It is this integrative nature of Cassirer's philosophy which Graeser seeks to apply in his book. It is typical of his approach that he draws repeated attention to the parallel between Cassirer's general conception and the present-day discussion of realism/antirealism associated with the names of Putnam and Rorty. Graeser examines a variety of aspects of Cassirer's philosophy in chapters on concrete and theoretical topics such as language, myth, and ethics or the nature of concepts , symbolism, and truth. Two concluding chapters, "Riickblick" (review) and "Ausblick" (prospect4), show how unfinished matters in Cassirer's philosophy pose problems for further research. In Graeser's view Cassirer's theses have the character of hypotheses and should be evaluated as such. Graeser avoids referring to Cassirer's philosophy as a form of Neo-Kantianism, but he does say that Cassirer's "approach" (Ansatz) is led by a transcendental question: what are the conditions of the possibility of meaning (Bedeutung)? (~8). In order to answer this question, we must have recourse to something more fundamental. Graeser criticizes Karl-Otto Apel's view that Cassirer assumed a theory of transcendental "subjectivity " in order to support his theory of meaning, finding no clear basis for Apers criticism in Cassirer's writings. Nonetheless, Graeser concludes that Apel raises the key BOOK REVIEWS 627 question of how strong a recourse to transcendental structures must be in order to "explain" semiotic functions and how weak they can be and still be explicative. Graeser does not answer this question, but it is to his credit to have formulated it clearly. To what extent is Cassirer's philosophy really transcendental? In a rare display of hyperbole Graeser terms Cassirer's rejection of the notion of immediately present content in perception "spectacular and provocative" (138). In Cassirer's radical theory of symbolism, there is no presence or, rather, the only presence is representation. But if Cassirer has broken with the subjectivism of transcendental philosophy, as Graeser seems to think, the question arises of where his philosophy then stands in regard to the proponents of philosophies of signs and symbols for whom signs only refer to other signs. This question is all the more pressing given Graeser's view that for Cassirer truth was a form of...

A History of Russian Philosophy: From the Tenth through the Twentieth Centuries. Volumes I and II (review)

BOOK REVIEWS 627 question of how strong a recourse to transcendental structures must be in order to "explain" semiotic functions and how weak they can be and still be explicative. Graeser does not answer this question, but it is to his credit to have formulated it clearly. To what extent is Cassirer's philosophy really transcendental? In a rare display of hyperbole Graeser terms Cassirer's rejection of the notion of immediately present content in perception "spectacular and provocative" (138). In Cassirer's radical theory of symbolism, there is no presence or, rather, the only presence is representation. But if Cassirer has broken with the subjectivism of transcendental philosophy, as Graeser seems to think, the question arises of where his philosophy then stands in regard to the proponents of philosophies of signs and symbols for whom signs only refer to other signs. This question is all the more pressing given Graeser's view that for Cassirer truth was a form of "coherence" 068). The point which readers of this journal will perhaps find uncongenial in Graeser's book is its emphasis upon systematic over historical interpretation. Natorp, for example , is not mentioned. The present writer does not find fault in Graeser's decision to read Cassirer as a contemporary thinker, but the historical reasons for Cassirer's neglect as a philosopher (a point which Graeser himself finds perplexing; 189) might themselves have philosophical bearing. That in postwar Germany Cassirer's reception was confined until very recently to footnotes and a fewjournal articles stands in sharp contrast to Graeser's overall high regard for Cassirer's achievements as a philosopher. His apparent lack of sympathy with the predominance of the (rarely mentioned) Frankfurt school and of Heidegger's influence seem to indicate an area in which historical research might have shed light on matters of systematic importance. Graeser shows where the structure of Cassirer's often hard-to-follow arguments lead and problems they lead to. On the whole, Graeser's book has an apologetic character. His strongest criticism of Cassirer is that his language is not clear enough, with terms like "Geist" and "Tun" leaving too much unsaid and giving much room for misinterpretation (186). This is no doubt why Graeser expends particular effort to reconstruct systematically Cassirer's key notion of the symbolic (Chapter 6). This book marks the beginning of a new positive phase in the German reception of Cassirer's philosophy. JOHN MICHAEL KROIS Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin Valery A. Kuvakin, editor. A History of Russian Philosophy: From the Tenth through the Twentieth Centuries. Volumes I and H. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1994. Pp. 747. Cloth, $89.95. This work, a collaborative effort by twenty-one Russian scholars, has much to recommend it, despite some obvious discrepancies between what it purports to be and what it is. Is it, as its opening sentence proclaims, "the first work by Russian historians on their national philosophy m be published in English"? Certainly not. Both a onevolume history by N. O. Lossky and a monumental two-volume history by V. V. 628 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 34:4 OCTOBER 1996 Zenkovsky have existed in English translation for decades, x Does it, as its subtitle claims, range from the tenth through the twentieth centuries? Hardly. Its final section deals with the idealist philosophers who came to maturity during Russia's "Silver Age" in the first decades of the twentieth century. Excluded are not only the endre school of Russian and Soviet Marxist philosophy (absent are Plekhanov, Bogdanov, even Lenin!) but also later non-Marxist Russian thinkers of importance such as Gustav Shpet and Alexey Loser. Is it an "indispensable reference work," as the dust jacket maintains? More on indispensability later, but i~ value as a reference work is seriously diminished by two circumstances. First, it omits some important thinkers--not only the twentieth- century philosophers just mentioned but such imposing earlier figures as Gregory Skovoroda and Nikolay Fyodorov. Second, it lacks an elementary requisite of a reference work-an index. The only way to locate the discussion of a particular thinker is to search the multi-page table of contents of each volume--and those tables list only the...

A Study of the Structure of Sport as a Cultural Form

The purpose of this study is to clarify the direction to understand the structure of sport as a cultural form. The following steps were adopted as the necessary procedure to attain this purpose;1) To verify the appropriateness of eliminating value-oriented ranks among cultural forms while studying the nature of each cultural form.2) To examine the difficulties in considering the structure of sport as a culture from the viewpoint of the concepts of culture so far adopted, and to develop a new standpoint to see the structure of sport through this examination.3) To find out the direction to understand the structure of sport based on this new standpoint.In order to attain the purpose, the frame of E. Cassirer's philosophy was adopted in this study.Since 1960's there has been a growing tendency to recognize sport as a culture in Japan. This tendency seemed to arise from an intention of enhancing the value of sport to be ranked with other cultural forms. However, it is obvious that all cultural forms have been formulated with close relationships among themselves, and each form has constructed its own constitution which is irreplaceable with another cultural form. Each form exists as a function indispensable to human nature which put meanings on chaotic impression of the world. In other words, they exist only as differences without any value-oriented ranks. Since value is usually set on an object according to a special criterion derived from several human tendencies, we should consider the object itself without its value if we try to study its nature. Therefore, to grasp the nature of a cultural form, it should be examined without consideration of its value-oriented rank.In Japan, distinctive qualities or administrative characteristics of sport phenomena have been referred to as the structure of sport. However, the structure of sport as a cultural form can not emerge through the study of these apparent aspects of sport since the structure and phenomena exist on different levels.In sport, skill is objectified as movement styles. Although a movement style phenomenaly disappears according to the end of the performance, it is, in fact, developed to a high degree in the movement subject or in other subjects who come in touch with the movement style. On the phenmenal level, one's skill exists within his organic limitations. His skill is, on the structural level, inherited beyond his organic limitations and will be continuously developed and objectified as new movement styles in sport. In other words, sport has its structure in which objectified skill and its spirit are continuouslly developed in a dialectic system to higher level. And organizational changes on one's organic level will reach to organizational formation of humankind, such as economic system, through sport as a cultural form. Therefore, it seems that sport exists as a function which has its own continuous and creative structure concerned with the nature of humankind.

Cassirer's Philosophy of Symbolic Forms and the Problem of History*

Cassirer's Philosophy of Symbolic Forms and the Problem of History*