Abstract

The argument of this paper develops in four stages. In the first I expose two fundamental and at the same time highly problematical questions which serve as points of departure for Cassirer’s philosophy of symbolic forms. In the second stage I set forth an answer which serves to unite the two questions and reveal their interpenetration. This answer assumes the form of an explication of the fundamental structure of experience. The third stage serves as a justification of this procedure by showing why the answer takes the form it does. This is accomplished by uncovering the basic ontological dimension presupposed in the answer and elaborating its development. The fourth and final stage is a repetition of the initial question in the light of this uncovering, and is done with a view toward recasting the answer in a more fundamental way. I think this outline will become clear in its intent, and will be seen to be in a peculiar way inevitable as the argument proceeds.