1.1 Symbols and the Creation of Myth Cassirer argues that symbols are essential elements within myth as they create a bridge between the subjective experiences and the objective reality. Symbols allow individuals to transcend the limitations of language, capturing complex emotions, experiences, and universal truths. He suggests that myths use symbols to convey deeper meanings and to connect human experiences to higher realms of existence. 1.2 Narrative and Ritual in Myth Cassirer emphasizes the role of narrative and ritual in myth, He asserts that myths are not mere fictional stories but rather attempts to give structure and meaning to human experiences. Through narratives, myths provide individuals with a sense of identity, communal belonging, and a framework for understanding the world. Rituals, on the other hand, serve as symbolic practices that reinforce the significance of myth by enacting its elements and fostering a sense of collective participation. 2. Evaluation of Strengths and Weaknesses While Cassirer's myth theory provides a valuable framework for understanding the significance of myth in human culture, it is not without limitations. This section will critically evaluate the theory's strengths and weaknesses. 2.1 Strengths of the Myth Theory A major strength of Cassirer's myth theory lies in its recognition of the universal nature of myth. He acknowledges that myths transcend cultural boundaries, revealing commonalities in human experiences and aspirations. By identifying these shared symbols and narratives, Cassirer highlights how myths contribute to cross-cultural understanding and the formation of a collective human heritage. Furthermore, Cassirer’s focus on symbols as a means of transcending language barriers has unique implications, especially in the context of anthropology and linguistics. Symbolic forms within myths can offer insights into the deep structures of human cognition and the evolution of language. 2.2 Weaknesses of the Myth Theory Despite its merits, Cassirer’s myth theory also has some weaknesses. Firstly, the theory's heavy emphasis on symbols may overlook the social, historical, and political contexts that shape the production and interpretation of myths. By reductive focus on the individual and universal perspectives, Cassirer neglects the relational and interactive aspects of myth within society.