ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
123
SPECIFICITY OF THE SYMBOL AS AN ARTISTIC TOUCH
Sharipova Dilnoza Shavkatovna
Senior teacher, Bukhara State University
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14020967
Abstract.
The article deals with the the problem of the symbol is the
field of philosophical knowledge, the intersection of various points of view,
philosophical positions, views. Symbolization is one of the most important ways
for any artist-thinker to comprehend reality. In the process of working on a
work, the author seeks to express the essential depths of the phenomena of
reality reproduced by him, those depths that are obviously inaccessible to direct
sensory perception and can be "captured" by the subject of perception only
indirectly, through a kind of semantic analogy and through the corresponding
emotional experiences.
Аннотация.
В статье рассматривается проблема символа как область
философского знания, пересечение различных точек зрения, философских
позиций, взглядов. Символизация - один из важнейших способов
постижения действительности для любого художника-мыслителя. В
процессе работы над произведением автор стремится выразить
существенные глубины воспроизводимых им явлений действительности,
те глубины, которые заведомо недоступны непосредственному
чувственному восприятию и могут быть «схвачены» субъектом
восприятия лишь опосредованно, через некую смысловую аналогию и
через соответствующие эмоциональные переживания.
Key words:
phenomena, communication, purpose, virtual, symbol,
information, meaning.
Ключевые слова:
явления, коммуникация, цель, виртуальный,
символ, информация, смысл.
There are different versions of the origin of the word “symbol”. Most
researchers believe that it goes back to the Greek SYMBOLON and means “a
conventional material identifying sign for members of a certain social group,
secret society, etc.” Russian poet of the Silver Age A. Bely believed that “symbol”
comes from the Greek “sumballo”, which means “connecting”. German scientist-
philosopher, one of the founders of modern hermeneutics and hermeneutic
phenomenology G.G.Gadamer argued that the word “symbol” originally meant
“document”, “identifying sign”, “certification”. [44, p. 118] He is echoed by the
French researcher P. Brunel, saying that originally this word implied a sign,
thanks to which the guest introduces himself, a plaque, which he presents.
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
124
M.M.Kasperavicius explained the origin of this word as follows: “In ancient
society the word ‘symbol’ denoted a certain joint action, a legal or political
agreement, as well as a conventional sign showing belonging to a particular
professional-religious grouping.
Symbols were used to designate draft ordinances drawn up at communal
meetings ... In addition, the symbols were named passes for entertainment
events, documents for receiving preferential bread from the state stores and
Roman tessaries - manured boards on which military orders were written.” [89,
p.Z] Rudolf Koch, author of an extensive study on symbols, states: “The word
‘symbol’ came into Western languages from the Greek word ‘symbolon’, which
means ‘mixed in a heap’. The very concept of “symbol” was used to denote a
meaningful image or meaningful sign, as well as ideas, feelings, and emotions. At
the ancient Greeks such means served as shards of broken tiles, with the help of
which people coming into contact could recognize each other, if the places of
breakage at joining coincided, so every symbol is in its nature a secret or at least
a conventional sign.” [100, p.G] The modern Russian researcher N.N.Rubtsov
writes: “In translation from the ancient Greek symbol means ‘to connect’, ‘to
merge’, ‘to bind’. The problem of the origin of the word “symbol” is not the
subject of our study. We have cited several interpretations of different scholars
only to emphasize the inherent diversity and ambiguity of this term.
The notion of “symbol” throughout the history of philosophical thought
has caused many interpretations. In English literary studies, the interpretation
of the symbol goes back to the works of Augustine the Blessed, who believed
that the visible world is a symbol, a reflection of the Divine world, earthly
attributes - a weak copy, a hint of the “Divine Ideas”.
The symbol is the meeting of the finite and the infinite. On the one hand, it is
a product of our consciousness, on the other hand, it manifests the principles,
ideas and meanings that exist independently of us and are inaccessible to our
consciousness in their entirety.The concept of “symbol” is used extremely widely
and seems, at a superficial glance, quite clear and understandable. But the
matter is not so simple - this concept in different areas of spiritual culture is
subjected to a specific analysis, in which the most diverse initial principles are
possible and, consequently, the most diverse aspects of consideration of the
symbol and its definition. As Y.M.Lotman correctly noticed: “We can say that
even if we do not know what a symbol is, every system knows what ‘its symbol’
is and needs it for the work of its semiotic structure.” [121, p.P] It should be
noted that we will consider the symbol in the system of culture, its functioning
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
125
first of all in literature. We will analyze the understanding of the symbol by
philosophers and psychologists, as well as cultural scientists.
The uncertainty of its meaning and use is connected with the fact that the
concept of “symbol” is similar to other concepts close to it, such as sign, allegory,
metaphor. They are often intertwined, replacing each other. And quite often the
symbol is understood and used as a conventional sign of any object or as a
metaphor. Therefore, the concept of “symbol” is one of the most controversial
and vague.
But, as noted by A.F.Losev, despite this, in the languages of all cultural
peoples persistently preserved this term. Thus, the Greek concept of “symbol
(symbolon)” as opposed to the concept of sign “semeion” or Latinized “signum”
terminologically fixed the distinction between them, preserved in all European
languages.
Throughout the development of philosophy and literary studies and in our
time, thinkers who paid close attention to the symbol, noted its specificity and
distinguished the symbol from similar concepts. For example, K.S. Stanislavsky
singles out as the main features of the symbol organic integrity and naturalness,
its ultimate brightness, originality and individual refinement, its multifarious
content or inexhaustible semantic depth. [177, p.227-228] But the peculiarity,
“otherness” of the symbol, fixed even in the language, did not prevent its
understanding and use in culture, in scientific and artistic activities as a sign or
trope. And first of all, we will try to understand why this happens and identify
the specific features of the symbol. We will establish the difference between the
symbol and other concepts similar to it.
Undoubtedly, both the sign and the symbol have formal and functional
similarities. For example, from the point of view of A.F.Losev, who in his later
works carried out a painstaking comparative study of the symbol and the sign,
they differ only in the degree of generalization, when the symbol is a type of
sign, extremely generalized signification. “The symbol is an unfolded sign, but
the sign is also an unfolded symbol, its germ.” [118, p. 31-132] The distinction
between sign and symbol, according to Losev, is determined by the degree of
significance of the signified and symbolized object. This understanding of the
differences between symbol and sign is very common and exists, for example, in
modern semiotics; here also adjoins the idea that the symbol and the sign are
only different degrees of vision of the world. But the criterion of significance is
purely subjective in nature, depends on a variety of social and historical
ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE
International scientific-online conference
126
circumstances, and therefore can not be considered the main and even the only
one.
Insufficient distinction of the functions of sign and symbol in modern systems of
scientific thinking leads to a lack of understanding of a serious problem
associated with the fundamental differentiation of different types of
consciousness and, consequently, different positions of a person in relations
with reality.
References:
1. Danesi M. The Semiotics of Emoji. London: Bloomsbury Academic
Publishing Plc., 2017.
2. Ekman P. Methods for Measuring Facial Action. In K.R. Scherer and P.
Ekman (eds.), Handbook of Methods in Nonverbal Behavior. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1982.
3.Olson L. C. And Finnegan C. A. Visual Rhetoric: A Reader in
Communication and American culture. London: Saga, 2008.
4. Peirce Ch. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vols. 1-8. Edited
by C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1931-
58.
5. Saussure F.de. Cour de linguistique generale. Paris: Payot, 1916.
