The symbol refers to “substituted entities,” to something other than what is translated by the direct meaning of the expression. One principle of symbolization is that of placing ourselves in the order of recognition which opens an access path to knowledge, that of keeping us within the horizon of remembrance in order to recompose the initial truth in its fullness and communicate its strong impression. In parallel with the universe ordered, according to objective laws, a symbolic universe is developed, ordered (...) according to its own laws (universes between the structures of which analogies are possible). Starting from these premises, in my paper I will refer in particular to the anthropological and cultural relevance of religious discourse and artistic language, to the interferences between them. (shrink)

In this paper I intend to show that the differences between the aesthetic experience and the religious experience do not “close” the dialogue between the aesthetic man and the religious man. Although these two types of experience are distinguished by “the way in which everyone understands its object” —there is a similarity between aesthetic experience and religious experience which resides in the fact that “towards their object, both are in an attitude of contemplation”.