Tytuł pozycji:
Antoine Mooij’s Phenomenology of Symbolization: Synthesizing Lacan and Cassirer
- Tytuł:
-
Antoine Mooij’s Phenomenology of Symbolization: Synthesizing Lacan and Cassirer
- Autorzy:
-
Kemling, Jared
- Data publikacji:
-
2019-07-31
- Wydawca:
-
Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Filozofii
- Źródło:
-
Eidos. A Journal for Philosophy of Culture; 2019, 3, 2(8); 135-139
2544-302X
- Język:
-
angielski
- Prawa:
-
CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa - Użycie niekomercyjne - Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 PL
- Dostawca treści:
-
Biblioteka Nauki
-
Przejdź do źródła  Link otwiera się w nowym oknie
Preview:
/Review:Antoine Mooij, Lacan and Cassirer: An Essay on Symbolisation, translated by Peter van Nieuwkoop (Leiden: Brill Rodopi, 2018), 256 pages./
The central argument of Lacan and Cassirer: An Essay on Symbolisation is that each thinker approaches the problem of symbolization in a way that ultimately complements the other; “that their opposing views are in fact mutually complementary, indeed correcting each other in essential ways” (LC, 4). Mooij argues that Cassirer, “gives primacy to meaning, to signification” (LC, 3), whereas Lacan, “draws attention… to the symbolising ‘signifiers’ even before a meaning has been established” (LC, 4). In other words, while both are concerned with symbolization, Cassirer emphasizes the signification (the meaning) whereas Lacan gives primacy to the signifier (the sign/symbol itself, rather than the meaning it signifies). Mooij believes that these two views can and should be integrated into what he calls a “third theory of representation” (LC, 4), that synthesizes these two complementary approaches. Mooij will later christen this third theory that he seeks to develop as a “phenomenology of symbolization” (LC, 173).