It does not exist a transnational symbol (transnational in itself). Language works just because there are not "ecumenical" signs. Every word, every sign, every symbol makes so that a world can live, and that other possible worlds cannot live.

On the contrary the problem is HOW A SYMBOL IS USED. When someone sits on "electric chear", to be a testimonial against death penalty, will you say to him "Why don't you put a gun at your head? In China the death penalty happens with a gunshoot at the head! So you don't want abolition in China!"

WITTGENSTEIN: THE PROBLEM IS THE USE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The aestethical relevance of the cross is just that it is not used as usual, but get on itself a new use, that means (WITTGENSTEIN) a new meaning, a new world of signification.

The aesthetical gap between the usual meaning and the new meaning made live that world of signification in which the manifestation won.

and all the rest (thanks to god) are only words.

davide tutino.