ON THE ROLE OF MYTHOLOGEM IN THE PROCESS OF REALITY OBJECTIFICATION IN E. CASSIRER'S CONCEPT

The article considers the meaning of mythologem in the context of E. Cassirer's concept of symbolic forms of culture, analyzes its role and importance in the formation of theoretical discourse. The objectivity factor determining the borders of mythological and scientific discourses is considered from the position of standardization which allows to argue the principles of reality "objectification". Special attention is paid to the analysis proposed by E. Cassirer of mutually possible transition of the "moment of thing" and the "moment of meaning" which in a sense can be presented as an analogy of relations between the reality and the model. From this point of view of special importance is the analysis of the concept "causality", about which E. Cassirer agrees with the conclusion of D. Hume: "Hume, in attempting to analyze the causal judgment of science, rather revealed a source of all mythical explanation of the world". The fact of the matter is that the causality principle may have various representative forms in different types of discourses, but the discourse itself may not be out of this principle. In this regard, the article explains the necessity to take into account that both various forms (mythologem and concept) at the same time are present in cultural and historical discourse. The mythological context, as well as the theoretical one, changes in a certain way in history. As E. Cassirer asserts "through analogy and equivalence" ways of constituting the world in both types of discourse it is reasonable to consider this assertion on the basis of the analysis of the concept "text" from the point of view of the fact that any text can be presented as an explication of objects of the internal experience. And for this reason (on the basis of internal experience) various forms of outlook cannot eliminate each other within a definite discourse. Comparison of mythological and theoretical world-view requires a comparative analysis of such forms of institutionalization of the world as space, time, and number, relevant to both types of the world-view. Despite the fact that these forms are radically different in both types of discourse, they are still core for various types of world-views. The statement of such circumstances is one of the arguments of the impossibility of a rational explanation of the "transition" of mythologem to concept.