@article {515799,
	title = {Betekenisverschuiving in het causaliteitsbegrip van Ernst Cassirer},
	journal = {Tijdschrift voor filosofie},
	volume = {70},
	number = {4},
	year = {2008},
	pages = {733{\textendash}761},
	abstract = {<p>Cassirers conception of causation has until now been treated largely on the basis of Determinism and Indeterminism in Modern Physics. In this article, I argue that a characterisation of this sort can not be complete. There appear to be several apparent contradictions (of which I discuss three) when we compare the concept of causality in Determinism and Indeterminism with treatments of the concept in other works, especially those of mythical causation. We need a general view of Cassirers conception of causality to account for these contradictions. I offer such a view, which is partly universal (in as far as it refers to universals as time and space) and partly contextual (in as far as it refers, through the conception of the object, to principles that are specific to certain symbolic forms). Then, I discuss the differences and the resemblances between theoretical and mythical causation, and, within the theoretical world view, between the natural, cultural and biological sciences.</p>},
	issn = {0040-750X},
	author = {Froeyman, Anton}
}
