Name: 螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬喂魏萎 蔚尉苇位喂尉畏
Rating: 4.1 (92 reviews)
ISBN: 9789604350346

Rate this book

螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬喂魏萎蔚尉苇位喂尉畏

Henri Bergson, 螝蠅蟽蟿萎蟼螤伪蟺伪纬喂蠋蟻纬畏蟼听(Translator), 螕喂维谓谓畏蟼螤蟻蔚位慰蟻苇谓蟿味慰蟼听(translator)

Rate this book

"螒蟺蠈蠈位伪蟿伪尾喂尾位委伪渭慰蠀, 畏 螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬喂魏萎蔚尉苇位喂尉畏 蔚委谓伪喂伪蠀蟿蠈蟺慰蠀伪蟺蔚蠀胃蠉谓蔚蟿伪喂蟽蟿慰蔚蠀蟻蠉蟿蔚蟻慰魏慰喂谓蠈. 螖喂伪尾维蟽蟿畏魏蔚蟺慰位蠉蟺蔚蟻喂蟽蟽蠈蟿蔚蟻慰伪蟺蠈蠈位伪蟿伪维位位伪. 危蠀谓苇尾伪位蔚渭维位喂蟽蟿伪蟽蟿慰谓伪未喂伪尾伪蟽蟿慰蠉谓蟺喂慰蟺慰位蠉蟿伪蠀蟺蠈位慰喂蟺伪魏蔚委渭蔚谓维渭慰蠀魏伪喂尾慰萎胃畏蟽蔚谓伪纬委谓慰蠀谓蟺喂慰魏伪蟿伪谓慰畏蟿维. 危蠀渭尾慰蠀位蔚蠉蠅蔚谓纬苇谓蔚喂谓伪伪蟻蠂委蟽蔚喂魏伪谓蔚委蟼蟿畏谓伪谓维纬谓蠅蟽畏蟿蠅谓苇蟻纬蠅谓渭慰蠀伪蟺蠈伪蠀蟿蠈"
(Henri Bergson)

螚蟽蠀渭尾慰位萎蟿慰蠀苇蟻纬慰蠀蟿慰蠀 Henri Bergson 蟽蟿畏谓伪谓伪谓苇蠅蟽畏蟿畏蟼蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪蟼蟿蠅谓伪蟻蠂蠋谓蟿慰蠀蔚喂魏慰蟽蟿慰蠉伪喂蠋谓伪, 魏伪胃蠋蟼魏伪喂畏蔚蟺喂蟻蟻慰萎蟺慰蠀维蟽魏畏蟽蔚蟿慰苇蟻纬慰蟿慰蠀蟽蟿慰谓蟽蟿慰蠂伪蟽渭蠈渭蔚喂味蠈谓蠅谓蠁喂位慰蟽蠈蠁蠅谓, 蠄蠀蠂慰位蠈纬蠅谓, 位慰纬慰蟿蔚蠂谓蠋谓, 魏伪位位喂蟿蔚蠂谓蠋谓, 伪位位维魏伪喂蔚蟺喂蟽蟿畏渭慰位蠈纬蠅谓萎胃蔚蟿喂魏蠋谓蔚蟺喂蟽蟿畏渭蠈谓蠅谓蟿慰蠀蔚喂魏慰蟽蟿慰蠉伪喂蠋谓伪 (魏蠀蟻委蠅蟼蟽蟿慰蟺蟻蠋蟿慰渭喂蟽蠈蟿慰蠀, 魏伪喂蠈蠂喂渭蠈谓慰蟽蟿畏螕伪位位委伪) 蔚委谓伪喂伪未喂伪渭蠁喂蟽尾萎蟿畏蟿蔚蟼. 危蟿伪蟺位伪委蟽喂伪渭喂伪蟼未蠀谓伪渭慰魏蟻伪蟿喂魏萎蟼胃蔚蠋蟻畏蟽畏蟼蟿畏蟼蟺蟻伪纬渭伪蟿喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼, 伪谓伪未蔚喂魏谓蠉慰谓蟿伪喂蠅蟼胃蔚渭蔚位喂蠋未蔚喂蟼慰喂苇谓谓慰喂蔚蟼蟿畏蟼未喂维蟻魏蔚喂伪蟼, 蟿畏蟼蔚谓蠈蟻伪蟽畏蟼, 蟿蠅谓未蠉慰蔚喂未蠋谓渭谓萎渭畏蟼, 蟿畏蟼味蠅蟿喂魏萎蟼慰蟻渭萎蟼, 蟿畏蟼伪谓慰喂蠂蟿萎蟼魏伪喂魏位蔚喂蟽蟿萎蟼魏慰喂谓蠅谓委伪蟼, 魏伪胃蠋蟼魏伪喂蟿畏蟼未蠀谓伪渭喂魏萎蟼魏伪喂蟽蟿伪蟿喂魏萎蟼胃蟻畏蟽魏蔚委伪蟼. 螘魏位伪渭尾维谓慰谓蟿伪蟼蟿畏味蠅萎蠅蟼蟽蠀谓蔚蠂萎未畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬喂魏萎未喂伪未喂魏伪蟽委伪, 慰 Bergson 蟺蟻慰蟿蔚委谓蔚喂魏蠀蟻委蠅蟼谓苇慰蠀蟼蟿蟻蠈蟺慰蠀蟼蟺蟻慰蟽苇纬纬喂蟽畏蟼蟿慰蠀味畏蟿萎渭伪蟿慰蟼蟿慰蠀蠂蟻蠈谓慰蠀, 蟿畏蟼蔚位蔚蠀胃蔚蟻委伪蟼, 蟿畏蟼伪谓蟿委位畏蠄畏蟼魏伪喂蟿畏蟼蔚喂魏蠈谓伪蟼, 蟿畏蟼蟽蠂苇蟽畏蟼伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪蟽蟿畏谓蠄蠀蠂萎魏伪喂蟿慰蟽蠋渭伪萎, 伪魏蠈渭畏, 伪谓维渭蔚蟽伪蟽蟿畏蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪魏伪喂蟿畏谓蔚蟺喂蟽蟿萎渭畏.
(螕.螤.)

螚 螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬喂魏萎蔚尉苇位喂尉畏, 伪蟺蠈蟿伪魏慰蟻蠀蠁伪委伪蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁喂魏维苇蟻纬伪蟿慰蠀螘蟻蟻委魏慰蠀螠蟺蔚蟻尉蠈谓, 蟽蠀谓伪谓蟿维蟿畏谓蠄蠀蠂慰位慰纬委伪魏伪喂蟿畏渭蔚蟿伪蠁蠀蟽喂魏萎纬喂伪谓伪蟽蠀纬魏蟻慰蟿萎蟽蔚喂渭喂伪伪蟺蠈蟿喂蟼蟺位苇慰谓蟺蟻蠅蟿蠈蟿蠀蟺蔚蟼胃蔚蠅蟻委蔚蟼纬喂伪蟿畏谓蔚尉苇位喂尉畏. 螣螠蟺蔚蟻尉蠈谓蔚蟻蔚蠀谓维蟿畏渭畏蠂伪谓慰魏蟻伪蟿委伪, 蟿畏谓蟿蔚位喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪魏伪喂蟿喂蟼伪谓蟿喂蠁维蟽蔚喂蟼蟿畏蟼蔚尉苇位喂尉畏蟼伪位位维蔚蟺委蟽畏蟼魏伪喂蟽畏渭伪谓蟿喂魏维味畏蟿萎渭伪蟿伪蠈蟺蠅蟼蔚委谓伪喂蟿慰谓蠈畏渭伪蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼, 畏蠁蠀蟽喂魏萎蟿维尉畏魏伪喂慰喂渭慰蟻蠁苇蟼蟿畏蟼谓蠈畏蟽畏蟼. 螣螠蟺蔚蟻尉蠈谓蔚未蠋伪谓伪蟺蟿蠉蟽蟽蔚喂蟿畏胃苇蟽畏蟿慰蠀纬喂伪蟿畏蠁蠀蟽喂魏萎蔚谓蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟿慰蠀螘纬蠋渭蔚蟿慰螌位慰.

螘螜危螒螕惟螕螚

螤巍惟韦螣螝螘桅螒螞螒螜螣: 螚蔚尉苇位喂尉畏蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼
螠畏蠂伪谓慰魏蟻伪蟿委伪魏伪喂蟿蔚位喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪
螚未喂维蟻魏蔚喂伪
韦伪伪谓慰蟻纬维谓蠅蟿伪蟽蠋渭伪蟿伪
韦伪慰蟻纬伪谓蠅渭苇谓伪蟽蠋渭伪蟿伪
螕萎蟻伪谓蟽畏魏伪喂伪蟿慰渭喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪
螣渭蔚蟿伪渭慰蟻蠁喂蟽渭蠈蟼魏伪喂慰喂蟿蟻蠈蟺慰喂蔚蟻渭畏谓蔚委伪蟼蟿慰蠀
螚蟻喂味喂魏萎渭畏蠂伪谓慰魏蟻伪蟿委伪
螔喂慰位慰纬委伪魏伪喂蠁蠀蟽喂魏慰蠂畏渭蔚委伪
螚蟻喂味喂魏萎蟿蔚位蔚慰位慰纬委伪
螔喂慰位慰纬委伪魏伪喂蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪
螒谓伪味萎蟿畏蟽畏蔚谓蠈蟼魏蟻喂蟿畏蟻委慰蠀
韦慰蟺伪蟻维未蔚喂纬渭伪蟿慰蠀慰蠁胃伪位渭慰蠉
螣螖伪蟻尾委谓慰蟼魏伪喂畏伪谓蔚蟺伪委蟽胃畏蟿畏蟺伪蟻伪位位伪纬萎
螣谓蟿蔚螔蟻喂蟼魏伪喂畏伪蟺蠈蟿慰渭畏蟺伪蟻伪位位伪纬萎
螣螁喂渭蔚蟻魏伪喂畏慰蟻胃慰纬苇谓蔚蟽畏
螣喂谓蔚慰位伪渭伪蟻魏喂蟽蟿苇蟼魏伪喂畏魏位畏蟻慰谓慰渭喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟿蠅谓蔚蟺委魏蟿畏蟿蠅谓蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿畏蟻喂蟽蟿喂魏蠋谓
螒蟺慰蟿蔚位苇蟽渭伪蟿伪蟿畏蟼蟽蠀味萎蟿畏蟽畏蟼
螚味蠅蟿喂魏萎慰蟻渭萎

螖螘违韦螘巍螣螝螘桅螒螞螒螜螣: 螣喂伪蟺慰魏位委谓慰蠀蟽蔚蟼魏伪蟿蔚蠀胃蠉谓蟽蔚喂蟼蟿畏蟼蔚尉苇位喂尉畏蟼蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼.
螡维蟻魏畏, 未喂维谓慰喂伪, 苇谓蟽蟿喂魏蟿慰
螕蔚谓喂魏萎喂未苇伪蟿畏蟼蔚尉蔚位喂魏蟿喂魏萎蟼未喂伪未喂魏伪蟽委伪蟼
螚伪蠉尉畏蟽畏
螒蟺慰魏位委谓慰蠀蟽蔚蟼魏伪喂蟽蠀渭蟺位畏蟻蠅渭伪蟿喂魏苇蟼蟿维蟽蔚喂蟼
螤蟻慰蟽伪蟻渭慰纬萎魏伪喂蟺蟻蠈慰未慰蟼
危蠂苇蟽畏蟿慰蠀味蠋慰蠀渭蔚蟿慰蠁蠀蟿蠈
危蠂萎渭伪蟿慰蠀味蠅喂魏慰蠉尾委慰蠀
螒谓维蟺蟿蠀尉畏蟿畏蟼味蠅喂魏蠈蟿畏蟿伪蟼
螣喂魏伪蟿蔚蠀胃蠉谓蟽蔚喂蟼蟿畏蟼蔚尉苇位喂尉畏蟼蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼: 螖喂维谓慰喂伪魏伪喂苇谓蟽蟿喂魏蟿慰
螤蟻蠅蟿伪蟻蠂喂魏萎位蔚喂蟿慰蠀蟻纬委伪蟿畏蟼未喂维谓慰喂伪蟼
桅蠉蟽畏蟿慰蠀蔚谓蟽蟿委魏蟿慰蠀
螙蠅萎魏伪喂蟽蠀谓蔚委未畏蟽畏
螚胃苇蟽畏蟿慰蠀伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀蟽蟿畏蠁蠉蟽畏

韦巍螜韦螣螝螘桅螒螞螒螜螣: 螚蟽畏渭伪蟽委伪蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼. 螚蟿维尉畏蟿畏蟼蠁蠉蟽畏蟼魏伪喂畏渭慰蟻蠁萎蟿畏蟼未喂维谓慰喂伪蟼
螤蟻蠈尾位畏渭伪蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼魏伪喂蟺蟻蠈尾位畏渭伪蟿畏蟼纬谓蠋蟽畏蟼
螚蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁喂魏萎渭苇胃慰未慰蟼
桅伪蠉位慰蟼魏蠉魏位慰蟼蟿畏蟼蟺蟻慰蟿蔚喂谓蠈渭蔚谓畏蟼蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁喂魏萎蟼渭蔚胃蠈未慰蠀
螘蟺喂蟽蟿萎渭畏魏伪喂蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪
韦伪蠀蟿蠈蠂蟻慰谓畏纬苇谓蔚蟽畏蟿畏蟼蠉位畏蟼魏伪喂蟿畏蟼未喂维谓慰喂伪蟼
螚蔚纬纬蔚谓萎蟼蟽蟿畏谓蠉位畏纬蔚蠅渭蔚蟿蟻喂魏萎蟿维尉畏
螣蠀蟽喂蠋未蔚喂蟼位蔚喂蟿慰蠀蟻纬委蔚蟼蟿畏蟼未喂维谓慰喂伪蟼
螕蔚蠅渭蔚蟿蟻委伪魏伪喂蟺伪蟻伪纬蠅纬萎
螕蔚蠅渭蔚蟿蟻委伪魏伪喂蔚蟺伪纬蠅纬萎
螣喂蠁蠀蟽喂魏慰委谓蠈渭慰喂
螒谓维位蠀蟽畏蟿畏蟼喂未苇伪蟼蟿畏蟼伪蟿伪尉委伪蟼
螖蠉慰伪谓蟿委胃蔚蟿蔚蟼渭慰蟻蠁苇蟼蟿畏蟼蟿维尉畏蟼: 纬苇谓畏魏伪喂谓蠈渭慰喂
螚伪蟿伪尉委伪魏伪喂慰喂未蠉慰蟿维尉蔚喂蟼
螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬委伪魏伪喂蔚尉苇位喂尉畏
螜未蔚伪蟿萎纬苇谓蔚蟽畏蟿畏蟼蠉位畏蟼
螝伪蟿伪纬蠅纬萎魏伪喂蟺蟻慰慰蟻喂蟽渭蠈蟼蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼: 螚慰蟻渭萎蟿畏蟼味蠅萎蟼
韦喂蔚委谓伪喂慰蠀蟽喂蠋未蔚蟼魏伪喂蟿喂蟽蠀渭蟺蟿蠅渭伪蟿喂魏蠈蟽蟿畏谓蔚尉苇位喂尉畏
螚蟺慰蟻蔚委伪蟺蟻慰蟼蟿慰谓伪谓伪蟽蟿慰蠂伪蟽渭蠈
螚伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺喂谓畏蟽蠀谓蔚委未畏蟽畏, 蟽魏慰蟺蠈蟼蟿畏蟼蔚尉苇位喂尉畏蟼
螚蟺谓蔚蠀渭伪蟿喂魏萎 (spirituelle) 味蠅萎

韦螘韦螒巍韦螣螝螘桅螒螞螒螜螣: 螣魏喂谓畏渭伪蟿慰纬蟻伪蠁喂魏蠈蟼渭畏蠂伪谓喂蟽渭蠈蟼蟿畏蟼蟽魏苇蠄畏蟼魏伪喂畏渭畏蠂伪谓喂蟽蟿喂魏萎伪蠀蟿伪蟺维蟿畏
螠喂伪渭伪蟿喂维蟽蟿畏谓喂蟽蟿慰蟻委伪蟿蠅谓蟽蠀蟽蟿畏渭维蟿蠅谓
韦慰蟺蟻伪纬渭伪蟿喂魏蠈纬委纬谓蔚蟽胃伪喂魏伪喂慰蠄蔚蠀未慰蔚尉蔚位喂魏蟿喂魏喂蟽渭蠈蟼
螒蠀蟿伪蟺维蟿畏蟿蠅谓喂未蔚蠋谓蟿慰蠀渭畏未蔚谓蠈蟼魏伪喂蟿畏蟼伪渭蔚蟿伪尾位畏蟽委伪蟼
螚蠉蟺伪蟻尉畏魏伪喂蟿慰渭畏未苇谓
韦慰纬委纬谓蔚蟽胃伪喂魏伪喂畏渭慰蟻蠁萎
韦伪蔚蟺喂蠂蔚喂蟻萎渭伪蟿伪蟿慰蠀螙萎谓蠅谓伪
螤位维蟿蠅谓魏伪喂螒蟻喂蟽蟿慰蟿苇位畏蟼: 畏螜未苇伪
螚蠁蠀蟽喂魏萎魏位委蟽畏蟿畏蟼未喂维谓慰喂伪蟼
韦慰纬委纬谓蔚蟽胃伪喂蟽蟿畏谓蔚蠈蟿蔚蟻畏蔚蟺喂蟽蟿萎渭畏
螣蠂蟻蠈谓慰蟼蟽蟿畏胃蔚蟿喂魏萎蔚蟺喂蟽蟿萎渭畏
螚渭蔚蟿伪蠁蠀蟽喂魏萎蟿畏蟼蔚蟺喂蟽蟿萎渭畏蟼
螝伪蟻蟿苇蟽喂慰蟼 (Descartes)
危蟺喂谓蠈味伪魏伪喂螞维喂渭蟺谓喂蟿蟼
螤伪蟻伪位位畏位喂蟽渭蠈蟼魏伪喂渭慰谓喂蟽渭蠈蟼
螚魏伪谓蟿喂伪谓萎螝蟻喂蟿喂魏萎
螣蔚尉蔚位喂魏蟿喂魏喂蟽渭蠈蟼蟿慰蠀危蟺苇谓蟽蔚蟻

螘螤螜螠螘韦巍螣
螚伪谓伪味蠅蟺蠉蟻蠅蟽畏蟿慰蠀蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓蟿慰蟼纬喂伪蟿畏蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪蟿慰蠀 Henri Bergson
1. 螚 "苇魏位蔚喂蠄畏" 蟿慰蠀渭蟺蔚蟻尉慰谓喂蟽渭慰蠉伪蟺蠈蟿慰蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁喂魏蠈蟺蟻慰蟽魏萎谓喂慰
2. 螚魏蟻喂蟿喂魏萎蟿蠅谓 Russell, Bachelard, Popper 魏伪喂 Piaget 蟽蟿畏蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪蟿慰蠀 Henri Bergson
3. 螚渭慰渭蠁萎蟺蔚蟻委伪谓慰蟻胃慰位慰纬喂蟽渭慰蠉蟿慰蠀 Bergson
4. 螚未喂伪魏蟻喂蟿喂魏萎蟺伪蟻慰蠀蟽委伪蟿慰蠀蟽蟿慰蠂伪蟽渭慰蠉蟿慰蠀 Bergson 蟽蟿畏纬伪位位喂魏萎蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪蟿畏蟼未蔚魏伪蔚蟿委伪蟼蟿慰蠀 1960
5. 螚伪谓伪尾委蠅蟽畏蟿蠅谓渭蟺蔚蟻尉慰谓喂魏蠋谓蟽蟺慰蠀未蠋谓: 1984-2004
6. 螞蠈纬慰喂蟺慰蠀蟺喂胃伪谓蠋蟼蟽蠀谓蔚蟿苇位蔚蟽伪谓蟽蟿畏谓伪谓伪味蠅蟺蠉蟻蠅蟽畏蟿慰蠀蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓蟿慰蟼纬喂伪蟿畏蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁委伪蟿慰蠀 Bergson 魏伪蟿维蟿畏谓蔚喂魏慰蟽伪蔚蟿委伪 1984-2004
危螚螠螘螜惟危螘螜危螘螤螜螠螘韦巍螣违
螔螜螔螞螜螣螕巍螒桅螜螒螘螤螜螠螘韦巍螣违

GenresPhilosophyScienceNonfictionPsychologyTheoryEvolutionFrance

550 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1907

321 people are currently reading

6,878 people want to read

About the author

Henri Bergson

420听books771听followers

Popular and accessible works of French philosopher and writer Henri Louis Bergson include Creative Evolution (1907) and The Creative Mind (1934) and largely concern the importance of intuition as a means of attaining knowledge and the 茅lan vital present in all living things; he won the Nobel Prize of 1927 for literature.

Although international fame and influence of this late 19th century-early 20th century man reached heights like cult during his lifetime, after the Second World War, his influence decreased notably. Whereas such thinkers as Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Jean Paul Sartre, and 尝茅惫颈苍补蝉 explicitly acknowledged his influence on their thought, Bergsonism of Gilles Deleuze in 1966 marked the reawakening of interest. Deleuze recognized his concept of multiplicity as his most enduring contribution to thinking. This concept attempts to unify heterogeneity and continuity, contradictory features, in a consistent way. This revolutionary multiplicity despite its difficulty opens the way to a re-conception of community, or so many today think.

What do you think?

Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars

601 (43%)

4 stars

450 (32%)

3 stars

244 (17%)

2 stars

64 (4%)

1 star

31 (2%)

Displaying 1 - 30 of 92 reviews

Fergus, Weaver of Autistic Webs

1,258 reviews17.8k followers

March 1, 2025

A book that is a Rhapsody to LIFE!

BLOWN HAIR IS SWEET
BROWN HAIR OVER THE LIPS BLOWN -
DISTRACTION, MUSIC OF THE FLUTE - STOPS AND STEPS OF THE MIND
OVER THE THIRD STAIR...
T.S. Eliot, Ash Wednesday

When T.S. Eliot penned these pensive lines in the Thirties, he meant by 鈥榮tair鈥� The Stairway of Perfection, an amazing mystical book written by the great medieval author Walter Hilton.

The THIRD Stair evokes the infamously treacherous False Dawn one thinks one sees, as a believer, during what a few centuries later would be described by Juan de la Cruz as the Dark Night of the Soul.

There, one encounters the spiritual 鈥渄istractions鈥� that can so easily derail nascent Faith.

Creative Evolution was seen as just such a False Dawn to settled 19-century Christians.

But to young and depressive Jacques and Raissa Maritain, it marked the Dawn of insight that led to their induction into the Church.

(Though you have to factor in to that equation the anomalous fact that over in Ireland, George Bernard Shaw鈥檚 socialism and anticlericalism were nourished and strengthened by it!)

And many others, in their enthusiasm, rejected God altogether...

As Tolstoy might have said, all believers look much the same; but all agnostics look vastly different. Agnostics of the world, unite? I doubt it - they're just like your antsy neighbours and, in fact, the rest of us misfits!

The point, Bergson says, is not Christian unity but Christian inspiration.

At least Shaw identified the Prime Mover with the Life Force.

And wasn鈥檛 Nietzsche, who started all this haranguing apotheosis of Life ruling over mediocrity in Thus Spake Zarathustra, just trying to feed his disciples with his atheism -

Over the aging and feeble body of the nineteenth-century European Church?

Yikes. A poor way to skin the cat.

The only way, infers Bergson, that we can truly LIVE our life is by being open to it.

And though Husserl in phenomenology was soon to insist upon putting all judgments in brackets -

And Heisenberg in Quantum Physics was to posit his Uncertainty Principle -

Surely the most important lesson for us is Bergson鈥檚 Openness to Life, for that鈥檚 how WE evolve into real, honest-to-goodness Adults.

And THAT - by way of illustration - is why Creative Evolution can be, to us conforming believers, at first a misleading proposition.

Though taken further as sheer insight into the power of God rather than as a pretext for further proselytising - it is the Morning Dew of Healing Grace...

Yes, exactly.

And Grace is LIFE ITSELF! Endless and unbounded.

Richard Fulgham

Author听13 books49 followers

August 18, 2009

This book must be read slowly and deliberately -- do so and it will give you an insight into the brilliance of one of the most revolutionary and extraordinarily perceptive philosopher scientists of the 20th Century, IMO.
Bergson changed the way scientists see the world by introducing his conception of an "original impetus", which began simply (if "intelligently") and evolved matter into living, increasingly complex lifeforms and concurrently evolved an increasingly complex consciousness within it -- as an "imperceptable thread" (my wording) ultimately called the elan vital.
In my case, after reading carefully and filling the book's margins with notes, Professor Bergson seems to be proving (showing) that all science up until his time (circa 1930's) was concerned with objects as they were at a particular moments, whereas in fact these objects were and are in a state of continual "being" (duration), making their actuality or essence unknowable.
He chronologically takes us through the writings of Plato and Aristotle (the natural trend of the intellect)-- Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz (becoming in modern science) -- and even through the Criticism of Kant and the evolutionism of Spencer. Bergson thoroughly critques each philosophy and shows us why they are not dealing the world as it really is.
Through this he weaves his own philosophical system based on Creation and Evolution by (quote):
". . . showing us in the intellect a local effect of evolution, a flame, perhaps accidental, which lights up the coming and going of living beings in the narrow passage open to their action: an lo! . . . (making) of this lantern glimmering in a tunnel a Sun which can illuminate the world.
"Boldly (Kantian and Spencerian science) proceeds with the powers of conceptual thought alone, to the ideal reconstruction of things, even of life. . . . But the essence of things escapes us, and will escape us always; WE MOVE AMONG RELATIONS; THE ABSOLUTE IS NOT IN OUR PROVINCE; WE ARE BROUGHT TO STAND BEFORE THE UNKNOWABLE.
" . . . BUT AN INTELLECT BENT UPON THE ACT TO BE PERFOMED AND THE REACTION TO FOLLOW . . . WOULD DIG TO THE VERY ROOT OF NATURE AND MIND."
In simpler words, the observation of any object changes reality for that object. It is only real as a moving "being", animated by an original impetus and kept real by an "elan vital" which cannot be known because "being" cannot be defined. What we call "real things" are illusions which beomce "real" to us only when we stop their duration. Heidegger spends thousands of pages unsuccessfully trying to define "being", which ultimately he can only label as "dasein". What we observe as the real world is matter and consciousness evolving concurrently from simple to complex as they move through space and time.
This means that the original impetus, the spark, the first flame, began neither in space nor time. Later quantum physics would support Bergson's insight, considering that an electron (as one example) cannot be seen without turning it into something else, or ever stranger, disappearing into what can only be other universes parallel to our own.
IMO, this means a creative force must exist that animates matter and consciousness; and that could only have originated in that Singularity outside time and space which I in my particular need call the thought of "God". You can call "it" what you will: the Tao, Bhudda, Nature, et al.
In my possession is a 1932 edition of "Creative Evolution" which had lingered on a library shelf over eighty years but had been checked out only three times after 1970. Sometimes I wonder where are my fellow philosophers and why I seem in my pained isolation to be the last of the 20th Century philosophers of mind. But that is because I am a crazed crackpot in the collective mind of those who measure men by their wealth. My contemporaries are in the universities, religious orders and lecture tours, where they belong. Yet even I am animated by the elan vital. Even I am part of the "God" finally perceived by Henri Bergson.
"Creative Evolution" was a sensation when it first appeared in 1932, the work of an already distinguished Professor Bergson of the College de France. It gave the world at last a new and scientific conception of the God long intuited by prophets, priests, poets, writers and grizzled, scarred, aging gray bearded philosophers like myself, dumb beasts of intellectual burdens, who desperately need a new physics to help us embrace an unknowable God created out of a Singularity and connecting our minds and bodies to what the Apostle Paul called Love.

Richard Lee Fulgham, Bel Air, 2009

Kamakana

Author听2 books412 followers

June 28, 2024

if you like this review i now have website:

220312: after reading i now have greater appreciation for , indeed for all of his metaphysics, and just wish i could more fully express this. an entirely different conception of time and being than what i am familiar with in phenomenology. it is helpful that i have read so much phenomenology and, now, Indic philosophy. the arguments for essential freedom, for the effort required, that must creatively surpass obstacles and is encouraged by limits, are all reasons i might reread the texts in this collection, though it is through secondary literature, on rather than by, that i most understand bergson. and in fact, are these not limits that encourage me as well... i have definitely decided it is four...

240716: i do not know what to say about this work, i do not follow it all, it might be closer to a 3, but the writing is very good. the introduction hails bergson as the most serious philosopher of life of the 20th century..., and makes a good argument for his continuing relevance, his unique approach, all of it down to his approach to time- duree- and valourization of intuition. as i am not studying him but have read a few by and a few on bergson, i can see how difficult, how contrary, his way of understanding 'intellect' and thereby 'science', as beholden to physics/geometry, that has no sympathy for living creation- the 'impetus'(elan vital) that manifests itself through evolution, that leads from single-cells to the great division between plant and animal, then the effective, practical, development of nervous system and then brain, enabling/informing motion...

the early chapters, the philosophical take on evolution, i found difficult and opposing what little i do know about the theory- eventually i began to see bergson is working not on the matrices of usual 'evolutionary biology' but on the philosophical concept of 'life'. this is not simply organic forms diversifying, sustaining, surviving through environmental changes, 'adapting', but how 'life' is truly creative, always new, always responsive, though his contention humans are somehow an evolutionary 'peak' seems mistaken. this seems an introduction of telos, a religious idea, insistence that there is a 'direction' to evolution, that we adapt through generations often in a 'neo-lamarckian' manner, we are the final result... as if evolution is now halted. this probably loses most evolutionary biologists if not scientists in general...

i do like his latter chapters, particularly the cinematographical mechanism of thought..., though i do not know how accurate is his dismissal/inquiry on the concept of 'nothing', mainly these were ideas i had read before, encouraging to remember, and certainly all the other reading on bergson was very helpful. the summation is heartening, as he goes through some history of philosophy to get there (plato, aristotle, descartes, leibniz, spinoza, kant, spencer), to his central idea: scientific knowledge is not the only or best way to live in the world, despite its obvious practical efficacy, in for example science, that the ideal of freedom is not met through mechanistic/geometric/spatial views, the ideal is met through the intuition/duration/creativity of time...

more

more

aa-francelit bergson-henri historicity

尝耻铆蝉

2,251 reviews1,158 followers

January 21, 2023

In this substantial volume, Bergson takes up the challenge of explaining the different forms that evolution has taken over time. Unlike many philosophers, he does not close his work to the reader. Instead, he involves this one with a book that, despite its requirement, remains understandable for the reader who is not necessarily a specialist in the field. We follow with the most significant interest his thought, the trajectory of this one. Above all, Bergson manages to communicate his subject with the reader. This subject is not a minor performance for a philosopher. Ultimately, we have a substantial work of undeniable richness here - to discover absolutely.

2023-readings e-5 french-literature

robin friedman

1,913 reviews361 followers

November 15, 2021

An Important Early Work Of Twentieth Century Philosophy

I wanted to reread Henri Bergson's "Creative Evolution" after reading William James. Although best known for his development of pragmatism, James had a highly speculative side late in his career, and he praised Bergson highly in his book, "A Pluralistic Universe." Although they have serious differences, both Bergson and James share an emphasis on a stream of consciousness view of the mind, and on the importance of freedom, chance, and indeterminacy.

Bergson wrote "Creative Evolution" in 1907. At James' urging it was translated into English in 1911 in the still standard translation of Arthur Mitchell. James died before he could write the introduction he contemplated to the book. The book is one of the relatively rare works of philosophy that received a large and enthusiastic popular reception. Bergson became internationally famous and highly sought out as a lecturer for some years following its publication. In 1927, Bergson received the Nobel Prize for literature, a rarity for a writer whose only publications were in philosophy. By the 1940's, however, the book had become little noticed by professional philosophers and lay readers alike. Of late, there have been scholarly efforts to look again at Bergson.

In one sense the early popularity of "Creative Evolution" is puzzling as sections of the book are notoriously difficult and obscure. The book left me cold when I first read it some years ago, but a second reading, after reading James, helped me understand where the book was going. Besides the lengthy technical discussions of matters ranging from biology to mathematics to the history of philosophy, Bergson was a master of allusion and analogy and of beautifully clear writing which pressed home his conclusions where his argumentation was dense and foggy. The writing is brilliant and poetic but makes use of loose metaphors and obscure thinking which lessens its value.

Part of the difficulty I and many modern readers have with the book lies in its approach to the nature of philosophy and its relationship to science. As the title indicates, "Creative Evolution" is in part about Darwinism and evolutionary theory. Bergson wants to show that there is more to human life and to human evolution that can be accounted for by what he terms mechanism. In the process of developing his position, Bergson spends a great deal of space with Darwinian theory and, in places, with his objections to it. Most of his objections, especially with further developments in biology, appear not well taken and outside the scope of how philosophy should be developing its questions and making its arguments. If philosophy is concerned with meaning and with reflections on science rather than with the substance of science, Bergson in many places steps over the line. Much of the book appears to be based on a willy-nilly combination of philosophical reflection with scientific issues which lessens its appeal and which contributed to the eclipse of the book after its early popular reception.

There remains much of interest in "Creative Evolution" to the extent that the book can be read as a reflection on the findings of science and on the possible limitations of science rather than as a critique of scientific findings. Bergson tries to find a way between a scientific philosophy of mechanism on the one hand and a teleological philosophy based upon ends and final causes on the other hand. Bergson develops a philosophy based upon duration and change -- the felt experience of the passage of time, which Bergson argues eloquently, cannot be explained either mechanistically or teleologically. Bergson argues that human endeavor and conduct cannot be fully explained by the methods of the natural sciences or, indeed, by any science as indeterminacy and freedom are at their core. He finds biological development for human beings was in the direction of freedom and intelligence. Intelligence, he argues, is basically pragmatic and related to physical, geometrical objects but does not exhaust human creativity. Bergson finds the source of creativity and change in time through a mysterious intuitive ability that tends to be covered over by practical intelligence. Here again, many modern readers, lay and philosophical, will demur to intuitionism. Bergson sees life as in its essential spiritual part as consisting in constant change and development in a direction that cannot be predicted in advance. In fact, every individual's development is unique.

Here is a lengthy paragraph from near the middle of Bergson's book that captures something of his thought, his writing, and his concept of philosophy as both individual and communal. Other passages could be cited as well. Bergson writes (pp 209-210)

"Human intelligence, as we represent it, is not at all what Plato taught in the allegory of the cave. Its function is not to look at passing shadows nor yet to turn itself round and contemplate the glaring sun. It has something else to do. Harnessed, like yoked oxen, to a heavy task, we feel the play of our muscles and joints, the weight of the plow and the resistance of the soil. To act and to know that we are acting, to come into touch with reality and even to live it, but only in the measure in which it concerns the work that is being accomplished and the furrow that is being plowed, such is the function of human intelligence. Yet a beneficent fluid bathes us, whence we draw the very force to labor and to live. From this ocean of life, in which we are immersed, we are continually drawing something, and we feel that our being, or at least the intellect that guides it, has been formed therein by a kind of local concentration. Philosophy can only be an attempt to dissolve again into the Whole. Intelligence, reabsorbed into its principle, may thus live back again its own genesis. But the enterprise cannot be achieved in one stroke: it is necessarily collective and progressive. It consists in an interchange of impressions which, correcting and adding to each other, will end by expanding the humanity in us and making us even transcend it."

In its approach, "Creative Evolution" is outside the mainstream of philosophy in the United States and in Europe and is something of a throw-back to German romanticism. The philosophical issues it raises, however, remain much alive. This is a frustrating, difficult book to read with valuable thought and insight intertwined with some unfathomable writing. It was a quirk that "Creative Evolution" became for a brief time a popular book. Readers who want to struggle with a difficult and in part outmoded work, may still find the effort worthwhile.

Robin Friedman

J.D. Steens

Author听3 books21 followers

January 19, 2010

Evolution, Bergson argues, is characterized by the progressive development of freedom, which culminates in human consciousness and the capacity for choice about how interaction with the environment will occur. Bergson's second theme is that the impulse that underlies evolution's movement toward freedom is energy. All life is energy. Energy is activity and mobility. Energy is the push behind how that activity will occur. Energy and freedom come together. Energy matches up with instinct and intelligence that are the twin poles of how life organizes its movement. But these are not pure states, and intelligence as consciousness exists in some limited degree within instinctive beings. Bergson writes that the humblest organism is conscious to the degree that it has the power to choose how it will move. This choice is freedom. Consciousness holds the capacity and power for choice, which reaches its most expansive expression in humans.

Evolution's march toward freedom is evolution's creativity. Bergson's stance here stands in contrast to the mechanistic (deterministic) themes then emerging in Darwinian thinking, but it also stands in contrast to predestined ends that others hold for human kind. Evolution is not the realization of a plan, Bergson says. In contrast to both, Bergson believes that this development of freedom resulted from life forms attempting to find new ways to survive in a demanding or hostile world. In this way, Bergson's theory is not different than the essence of Darwinian theory.

Bergson's own creative contribution to evolutionary theory is his emphasis on "becoming." Life is never a static state, but is continually changing. Static states are but moments in time that have been isolated by thought. Here he takes on Greek thought that would relegate ceaseless motion to an illusory material world that is secondary to the world of eternal forms. Uncomfortable with change, predominant Greek philosophy (Plato and after) addressed their dilemma with their own sleight of hand by positing logical truths as eternal forms as there can be no dispute that, for example, "A equals A." But Bergson says in reality there is no such Form. Bergson is equally critical of modern scientific theory that isolates as it analyzes, looking at parts as opposed to parts of wholes that transform through time. Science misses the whole that provides a simple unity of function, despite its dependence on a multiplicity of parts (sub-actions). In his emphasis on wholes and transformation, Bergson is notably similar to the structuralist thought of Jean Piaget who was to write later in the century.

In our free choices, Bergson says we create ourselves and this, along with innate character, makes us individual. But this self is not a thing. It is continually re-made, yet variability here is premised on deeper reality to our soul. What is the permanent core to our life is our impulsive force, which is ourselves as self-organizing entities. The self, in effect, goes through life not as solid matter, but as a wave. In this way, Bergson's theory seems to back into modern quantum theory about the ultimate nature of reality, suggesting that perhaps there is more similarity between organic and non-organic matter than once supposed.

Yet, there is a difference and this constitutes Bergson's essential underlying focus. Bergson traces his theory back to the beginning of life itself, to that transition point between life and non-life where the former draws energy from the latter and converts inert matter into life. The role of life is to place indeterminacy into matter. Life is a current of energy sent through matter, he writes, and draws from it whatever it can. In this way, life "spiritualizes matter." Heredity transmits more than character and physical traits. It transmits vitality, a single, powerful unity of impulse, a genetic energy that fights against disorder. This life force takes solar energy, stores it, and then uses it ("explosively") to survive. As the embodiment of this energy, we are a unity that then converts energy into a multiplicity of actions that enable our bodies, and ourselves, to survive.

Taking some liberty with Bergson, this unity - this self-organizing capacity directed toward survival - is our core Self, as it is the continuous entity that survives throughout all of its transformations. It is this life force that constitutes our essence and innermost soul. As with Schopenhauer's Will, Bergson's "elan vital" may be dismissed as overly obscure or mystical by many, but this is the terminology that captures the essence of life's drive to survive, to seek its well-being, and to reproduce itself. What this life force might be in more specific terms continues to be illusive to this day, and Bergson should not be faulted for not providing greater definition.

As a final comment, and as a criticism, humans have freedom of choice. This is not in doubt. But Bergson does not make it clear that such freedom is not pure. Humans are free to choose, but to do what? To what ends do they direct their (free) choice? Ultimately, action is directed toward evolution's twin goals, which are really the same thing: survival and reproduction. These goals are the fixed essences of life itself. In this sense we are not so free after all (even though we can commit suicide). As with all life forms, we seek to be free to achieve our life-given natures (ends) and to preserve ourselves as self-organizing entities, fighting to maintain order amid the pressures of disorder. The capacity to do this with maximum flexibility manifests itself in the free will of humans, but this capacity - remarkable as it is - is nevertheless directed toward the same ends we share with all life forms. Like them, we seek to be free to survive, to achieve well being, and to achieve evolution's "purpose," which is to reproduce ourselves. In this way, we share the same essence as all of life.

Mohamed Karaly

284 reviews52 followers

November 24, 2016

賲賳兀噩賲賱丕賱賰鬲亘丕賱鬲賶賯乇兀鬲賴丕貙賵亘氐乇賮丕賱賳馗乇毓賳賳鬲丕卅噩亘乇噩爻賵賳賵氐賷丕睾丕鬲兀賮賰丕乇賴丕賱賳賴丕卅賷丞貙賮噩賲丕賱賴賮賶丿賯鬲賴賵賱睾鬲賴貙賵賮賶氐賮丨丕鬲賲賳丕賱賰鬲丕亘賵氐賱鬲賱匕乇賵丞賲賲鬲毓丞賱丕賳賶賵噩丿鬲購賳賮爻賶兀賲丕賲賱丕毓亘賷賱毓亘亘丕賱賮賱爻賮丞貙兀匕賰乇賲賳賴丕氐賮丨丕鬲丕賱鬲賮乇賷賯賲賳丕賱毓賯賱賵丕賱睾乇賷夭丞. 禺賮丞賵丿賯丞賴匕丕丕賱賱毓亘乇亘賲丕賷禺賮賮丕賳賲賳丕賱兀氐賵丕鬲丕賱賲夭毓噩丞賱鬲氐賲賷賲亘乇噩爻賵賳丕賱賲賱丨丨賵賱丕毓鬲賯丕丿丕鬲賴. 賱匕賱賰賮賯乇丕亍丞賴匕丕丕賱賰鬲丕亘賰丕賳鬲兀賲鬲毓賲卅丞賲乇丞賲賲丕鬲賵賯毓鬲亘毓丿賲丕鬲氐賵乇鬲賴賲賳賯乇丕亍鬲賶毓賳賮賱爻賮丞亘乇噩爻賵賳賮賶賰鬲亘丕賱匕賷賳賱禺氐賵丕賮賱爻賮鬲賴. 兀賲丕賰鬲丕亘鬲賶毓賳賲囟賲賵賳賮賱爻賮丞亘乇噩爻賵賳賮卮賶亍賱丕賷爻鬲賵賮賷賴賲賯丕賱賯氐賷乇貙賵廿賳賲丕賷鬲賵睾賱賵賷賳卮乇兀孬乇賴賮賶毓賲乇賰丕賲賱賲賳丨賷丕丞兀賮賰丕乇賲賳賯乇兀賴

Beauregard Bottomley

1,151 reviews771 followers

December 31, 2018

What鈥檚 that space that floats between each of your thoughts, you know the similar thing that exists between the essence of you and that of the outside world? I鈥檓 going to call it the 鈥榦ntological difference鈥�. Bergson explains it as a process of creative evolution.

Instinct is using the order that already exists. Intelligence is using the unordered. The intuition closes the gap between the essential and the accident and of the form without matter. There is a difference of kind as well as levels in consciousness; humans are special; according to Bergson and who says all of these things and argues that within all life processes both within a life and life as a whole across a species there is a final purpose (Spinoza, who is mentioned frequently by Bergson, said for all things there is 鈥榗onatus鈥�, a striving. Bergson doesn鈥檛 mention that precisely but he will speak about Spinoza and Leibniz鈥檚 monads). Bergson mentions the unordered is only understood relative to the ordered and does tie that back to the second law of thermodynamics.

Science separates us from reality (Bergson will say). There is a lived time with duration, and the objective time outside of us and how we process the world. Proust believes similarly and writes about it (I鈥檓 up to volume three of 鈥業n Search of Lost Time鈥� (about 1915 - 1920) and I definitely see Bergson鈥檚 influence). Bergson makes this fundamental for his system. Intuition is his starting point.

Bergson (in this book from 1907) will say the world is not things and that facts are part of the world. For example, a sentence is made up of words and each word only makes sense when the sentence is understood, the world needs all of its parts for understanding and facts in isolation are lonely. Our intellect is such that what we know about the world is how we understand the world because that is how the world reveals itself to us. Heidegger (in 1927) makes the world about things and gives a world structure such that 鈥榖eing is time and time is finite鈥�, and that the world consists of 鈥榩resent-at-hand鈥� and 鈥榬eady-at-hand鈥� and 鈥榙asein鈥�, and being-in-the-world requires a world outside of us. Wittgenstein (in 1921) in his first line of his Tractacus says 鈥榯he world is made up of facts鈥� and concludes that 鈥榃hereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.鈥� Heidegger footnotes Einstein鈥檚 concept of Time out of 鈥楤eing and Time鈥� and explicitly appeals to Bergson鈥檚 duration. Hannah Arendt in 鈥楲ife of the Mind鈥� (from 1971) latched onto Bergson and lived time (duration).

Bergson writes an incredibly intelligent book. He gets that Descartes assumes away a world outside of us in order to get certainty, while Bergson knows that we must be part of the world in order to have self-awareness. Bergson definitely follows Plotinus and thinks our intelligibility comes from more than the things that make up the world. Bergson will give life an 鈥榚lan vital鈥�, a protoplasm of sorts. Bergson thinks that there can be form without matter, essence without substance, or thatness without whatness, the creative evolution through intuition gives us our world according to Bergson.

There is a depth to this book that I seldom come across today. I understand why Bergson won the Nobel Prize in Literature and I would think this book, 鈥楥reative Evolution鈥� was his signature book. Kant, Spinoza, Aristotle, Plato, and Plotinus each play a major role in this book and the unfolding of the story of the world 鈥榖ecoming鈥� rather than a world as 鈥榖eing鈥�.

Sajid

448 reviews103 followers

December 9, 2022

In Bergson we find life in its freest and purest movement

It would not be a mistake if we consider Creative Evolution as one of the greatest philosophy books ever written. Bergson not only anticipated modern scientific theories of psychology, he literally covers the whole tradition of phenomenology and cosmology . What Heidegger or Sartre said some years later Bergson formulated those all by himself. No wonder that Deleuze found his solace in Bergson. More than anybody Deleuze took a lot from Bergson. And personally i think Bergson belong to that giant club of philosophers like Spinoza, Kant and Hegel. But unfortunately people know very little about him nowadays.

So what Bergson does in Creative Evolution that can be considered as groundbreaking? What Bergson really does in this book is really systematic, easy to understand(at least for me) and beautiful at the same time(how can we forget his great sense for prose). Throughout the half of the book Bergson refuted those mechanistic and teleological understanding of evolution. And he was convincing of course. The evolution of life on this planet doesn鈥檛 evolve according to some laws or concepts. Rather life鈥攃orresponding with whole of the cosmos鈥攊s an ongoing process of creation. As someone says,life goes on. But in human realm there is a twist. We have a very refined and weird kind of intellect unlike any other animals. And our intellect is always concerned with material world,the feild of our actions. We always anticipate a future,we always learn from a past mistake, the present is always a void ground making way for the future. Just beacuse our ancestors developed this way of coping with the world. They had to measure distance, time,matters and shape them in a certain way to survive. And that made them stronger as well. Thus we are even now going on with this intellectual way of cutting down,measuring, utilizing. But along this line to refine our intellect more and more we somehow suppressed our life of intuition. And intuition is that truest form of life,Bergson says. Intuition is that very movement of life itself. Of which we can find a glimpse of in art.

Bergson then introduces 鈥榠ntuition鈥�. Intuition is conscious instinct reflecting on and enlarging itself. It is not just whatever your gut tells you. Art shows that intuition is possible. Bergson calls for an organized effort towards intuition, which relates to instinct and art the way science relates to intelligence and observation. Both intuition and science should continually inform and strengthen each other.

The evolution of life is a broad current of consciousness with an enormous multiplicity of interwoven potentialities. Each branch focuses more on its own particular goals rather than the work of the whole. Instinct at first seems to be the more effective strategy, since it remains focused on itself, but it is limited. Intelligence first concentrates on external matter, then gains the ability adapt to many objects, and so can awaken the potentialities of intuition. Gaining mastery by invention is more useful than the material invention itself. Humans are unique not just because we are more intelligent than animals, but because our intelligence has set consciousness free.

Otto Lehto

475 reviews211 followers

April 11, 2020

Bergson's most famous book is mesmerizing and visionary. It is also partially unscientific, unverifiable, and mystical. It looks at how time, consciousness, and evolution can be rethought beyond the formal confines of post-Kantian philosophy and positivism in science. The central idea is that the universe is shaped by an original impetus, an 茅lan vital, that underlies creative evolution and that leads to the birth of novelty and differentiation in cosmic history. This creative evolution cannot be fully studied by the means of positivistic mechanical science because you need to develop your intuition to have access to the internal sense of time, i.e. what Bergson calls "duration". However, through appropriate philosophy and self-reflection people can come to grasp how their own consciousness derives its freedom of action and creative impulse from this cosmic force.

Bergson claims that the visions of Darwinian evolution and materialistic determinism - the most daring and rational offspring of modern science - are only useful metaphors and approximations that leave out something essential of the cosmic process. They do not capture, claims Bergson, the internal force that gushes forth from the primordial impetus of the universe. They do not capture the creative impulse that makes up the internal (intuitive) counterpart to the external (scientific) view of evolution. The fault of science is that it mistakes the external "snapshot" image of this cosmic process for the process itself. Science privileges the scientifically measurable and calculable emergence of ever new structures and lifeforms for the very simple reason that the human mind and science have evolved to see everything in terms of geometry and material relations.

Bergson utilizes clear metaphors and sharp figures of speech that leave a strong impression, evoke new perspectives, and suggest visions of life. They persuade the reader even if they don't fully convince her. The clarity of his style helps to explain and bring down to earth an otherwise obtuse metaphysical theory. In fact, I would rank Bergson as one of the finest stylists in modern philosophy. (He is sort of an anti-Hegel in this regard.) His prose is artful and logical.

Bergson's argument is, in many ways, a continuation of Kant's phenomenology, the insights of Spinoza and Leibniz, and the evolutionary theories of Spencer and Darwin. He overstates the uniqueness of his insights in relation to these earlier thinkers. Furthermore, his arguments against materialistic determinism are not very convincing because they violate the very division of labour that Bergson rightfully sees separating the scientific method from the intuitive method. The scientific method must pursue its own course that inevitably leads to Darwinism and determinism and there is nothing the intuitive method can do about that. Bergson oversteps the boundaries of the powers of the intuitive method when he doubts the possibility of purely material emergence because he smuggles in creative evolution as a scientific concept and not merely as an intuitive concept. To assume that the intuitive method can override the methodology of science is absurd since the intuitive method cannot touch the material world. Nothing in the intuitive method suggests that life and creativity could not have emerged spontaneously. The "unguided" Darwinian picture of creative evolution might still represent an accurate scientific picture of reality.

Bergson's project is exceedingly original and lyrical. It can best be understood as "spiritualized phenomenology" - which is more of an art than a science. Although his criticism of Kant, Spinoza, and Spencer are uncharitable, he provides some useful exegetical analysis of their work. And even though he contrasts his intuitive method with the scientific method and claims that it is superior in understanding evolution, it would be unfair to paint Bergson as a wholly unscientific or anti-scientific thinker. In many ways his understanding of natural science and evolutionary theory was top notch and ahead of its time. Despite his proclivities, Bergson was willing to give credence to science as a useful and worthy exercise (for the most part) as long as it understands its own limitations and sticks to its own epistemic domain. Bertrand Russell was wrong to denounce Bergson as essentially worthless drivel. Bergson is a very rigorous and rich thinker. His insights can be studied for the ample ammunition that they provide for rethinking the nature of nature.

Ruba Jarrar

5 reviews5 followers

September 5, 2019

丕賱鬲胤賵乇丕賱賲亘丿毓 /賴賳乇賷亘乇睾爻賵賳
賰鬲丕亘賷賯毓賮賷 385 氐賮丨丞
賲賯爻賲廿賱賶兀乇亘毓賮氐賵賱
賮賷丕賱賮氐賱丕賱兀賵賱賷賳丕賯卮丕賱賮賷賱爻賵賮亘乇睾爻賵賳丨乇賰丞鬲胤賵賾乇丕賱丨賷丕丞 - 丕賱丌賱賷丞賵丕賱睾丕卅賷丞 - 賵賴賲丕丨丕賱鬲丕賳賷噩丿賴賲丕丕賱毓賯賱賮賷賲鬲賳丕賵賱賴.
賲亘賷賳丕賸丕賳賴賲丕賱丕鬲氐賱丨丕賳賱鬲毓賱賷賱丨乇賰丞丕賱鬲胤賵乇賵丕賳亘丿鬲丕丨丿丕賴賲丕賮賷丨丕賱丞氐賷丕睾鬲賴丕亘氐賵乇丞噩丿賷丿丞鬲氐亘丨兀賵賮賯賲賳丕賱兀禺乇賶賵賷爻鬲賴賱丕賱賮氐賱亘丕賱丨丿賷孬毓賳賲匕賴亘丕賱丿賷賲賵賲丞毓賳丿賴亘賵氐賮賴丕夭賲賳賵丕丨丿賲賲鬲丿賲賳丕賱亘丿丕賷丞賱賱賳賴丕賷丞賵賱丕鬲賵噩丿亘賴賮賵丕氐賱賷毓賳賷賷毓鬲亘乇賴賲孬賱丕賱爻賷賲賮賵賳賷丞兀賵丕賱賱丨賳丕賱賲賵爻賷賯賷賷亘丿兀賲賳亘丿丕賷丞丕賱丨賷丕丞廿賱賶賳賴丕賷鬲賴丕 .
" 賲丕賲賳丕賳賮毓丕賱兀賵鬲氐賵乇兀賵賮毓賱廿乇丕丿賷廿賱丕賰丕賳賲鬲睾賷乇丕賸賮賷賰賱賱丨馗丞賵兀賳丕賱丨丕賱丞丕賱賳賮爻賷丞廿匕丕鬲賵賯賮鬲毓賳丕賱鬲睾賷賾乇鬲賵賯賮鬲" 丿賷賲賵賲鬲賴丕 " 毓賳丕賱噩乇賷丕賳 .
" 賵丕賱丨賯兀賳丕賱賲乇亍賷鬲睾賷乇丿賵賳丕賳賯胤丕毓賵廿賳丕賱丨丕賱丞丕賱賳賮爻賷丞匕丕鬲賴丕賱賷爻鬲爻賵賶鬲睾賷賾乇.
亘丕賱鬲丕賱賷賮丨爻亘亘乇睾爻賵賳丕賱丿賷賲賵賲丞賴賷兀氐賱丕賱賲丕丿丞賵丕賱夭賲賳賵丕賱丨乇賰丞賵丕賱丿賷賲賵賲丞卮賷亍賱丕賲丕丿賷賵賱丕賷賲賰賳兀賳賳丿乇賰賴丕丕賱丕亘丕賱賭" 丨丿爻 "
賵賷卮乇丨亘乇睾爻賵賳丕賱丨丿爻亘賲賯賵賱丞乇丕卅毓丞
丕賱丨丿爻賴賵兀賳賷賵噩丿賷賵噩丿賴賵兀賳賷鬲睾賷乇貙賷鬲睾賷乇賴賵兀賳賷賳囟噩貙賷賳囟噩賴賵兀賳賷禺賱賯賳賮爻賴亘賳賮爻賴亘丕爻鬲賲锟斤拷丕乇

賮賷丕賱賮氐賱丕賱孬丕賳賷賷賳丕賯卮丕賱丕鬲噩丕賴丕鬲丕賱賲鬲亘丕賷賳丞賱鬲胤賵乇丕賱丨賷丕丞 : 丕賱禺賲賵丿貙丕賱毓賯賱貙丕賱睾乇賷夭丞
丨爻亘賮賱爻賮丞亘乇睾爻賵賳賷賵噩丿賮賷賰賱兀噩夭丕亍賴匕丕丕賱賵噩賵丿 -賲賴賲丕鬲賳賵毓鬲兀卮賰丕賱賴丕賵賲賴賲丕丕禺鬲賱賮鬲 - 賯賵丞賰丕賲賳丞賲鬲卮丕亘賴丞毓賳丿丕賱噩賲賷毓賷爻賲賷賴丕 " 丕賱丿丕賮毓丕賱丨賷賵賷 " " 丕賱丨賷丕丞"
丕賱丿丕賮毓丕賱丨賷賵賷丿丕禺賱丕賱賲賵噩賵丿丕鬲賴賵兀賰孬乇賲賳丕賱兀噩爻丕賲丕賱賲丕丿賷丞賴賵丕賱賯賵丞丕賱賳丕賲賷丞丕賱鬲賷鬲爻鬲胤賷毓兀賳鬲爻鬲乇丿賳賮爻賴丕賴賵丕賱丨賷丕丞 / 丕賱丨丕賮夭丕賱匕賷賷賵賱丿賴匕丕丕賱毓丕賱賲毓賰爻丕賱賲丕丿丞賵囟丿丕賱噩賲賵丿囟丿丕賱氐丿賮丞 .
賮賰丕賳賷乇賶丕賳賴賷賵噩丿賴賳丕賰鬲氐賲賷賲 / 賯氐丿賱賱兀卮賷丕亍亘丿丕禺賱賴丕賵賱賷爻賮賷禺丕乇噩賴丕賮賯胤 " 丕賱丕賳鬲禺丕亘丕賱胤亘賷毓賷丕賱匕賷鬲丨丿孬毓賳賴丿丕乇賵賳 " 丕賷丕賱丌賱賷丞丕賱鬲賷鬲丨丿孬賮賷鬲胤賵乇丕賱賰丕卅賳丕賱丨賷賵賴賷兀乇亘毓兀賲賵乇
丕賱賵乇丕孬丞貙鬲睾賷賷乇丕賱賲賳丕禺/ 鬲睾賷賷乇賲賳丕禺丕賱胤亘賷毓丞貙賯丕亘賱賷丞丕賱鬲兀賯賱賲貙丕賱丕賳噩丕亘貙丕賱氐乇丕毓賲賳兀噩賱丕賱亘賯丕亍 .
賵亘賴匕丕丕賱賰賱丕賲毓賳丕賱丿丕賮毓丕賱丨賷賵賷亘乇睾爻賵賳鬲丨丿賶賰賱兀氐丨丕亘丕賱賳馗乇賷丞丕賱賲丕丿賷丞賲賳鬲賵賲丕爻賴賵亘夭貙丿賷賮賷丿賴賷賵賲貙丕賱亘丕乇賵禺爻亘賷賳賵夭丕貙賰丕乇賱賲丕乇賰爻貙賮賷乇亘丕禺貙爻亘賳爻乇賵睾賷乇賴賲賱兀賳夭賰賱賴丐賱丕亍毓噩夭賵丕丨爻亘亘乇睾爻賵賳毓賳鬲賮爻賷乇賵賱丕丿丞丕賱丨賷丕丞賮賷丕賱賲丕丿丞丕賱噩丕賲丿丞 .
賮賷丕賱賮氐賱賷賳丕賱兀禺賷乇賷賳賲賳丕賱賰鬲丕亘賷丨丕賵賱亘乇睾爻賵賳兀賳賷乇丿丕賱毓丕賱賲亘兀爻乇賴賱賲亘丿兀賵丕丨丿賴賵賳馗乇賷丞丕賱鬲胤賵乇毓賳丿丿丕乇賵賳賲毓丕賱鬲兀賰賷丿毓賱賶賲丨丕賵賱丞鬲賴匕賷亘賴匕丕丕賱鬲胤賵乇賵賱賷爻鬲睾賷賷乇噩賵賴乇賴賮賴賵賷丐賲賳亘賳馗乇賷丞丕賱鬲胤賵乇賱賰賳丕賱廿禺鬲賱丕賮亘賷賳賴賵亘賷賳丿丕乇賵賳廿賳丕賱兀禺賷乇賳馗乇賷鬲賴毓亘丕乇丞毓賳丨賱賯丞賲鬲氐賱丞亘丨賱賯丞貙丨賱賯丕鬲氐賱亘丞賰賱毓賳氐乇賷丐丿賷廿賱賶丕賱毓賳氐乇丕賱匕賷亘毓丿賴賮鬲胤賵乇丕賱賰丕卅賳丕鬲丨爻亘賴匕賴丕賱賳馗乇賷丞賷兀鬲賷丨爻亘賯賵丕賳賷賳禺丕乇噩賷丞氐丕乇賲丞賴賷賯賵丕賳賷賳丕賱丕賳鬲禺丕亘丕賱胤亘賷毓賷丕賱兀乇亘毓丞丌賳賮丞丕賱匕賰乇 . 亘丕賱鬲丕賱賷賮賴賵毓丕賱賲丨爻亘亘乇睾爻賵賳賲氐賲鬲 / 賲賷鬲
賮丨丕賵賱兀賳賷亘孬賮賷賴丕賱丨賷丕丞 .
賮丕賱毓丕賱賲丕賱丿丕乇賵賷賳賷賲睾賱賯噩丕賲丿 .
賷賲賰賳兀賳丕賱禺氐賮賱爻賮丞亘乇睾爻賵賳亘噩賲賱丞亘爻賷胤丞賴賷
" 賲丨丕賵賱丞廿丨賷丕亍毓丕賱賲賲賷鬲 " 賵鬲兀賰賷丿賱賱丨乇賷丞賮賷毓丕賱賲丕賱賲丕丿丞丕賱氐賱亘 .
賵賴賳丕賲賰賲賳丕禺鬲賱丕賮賮賱爻賮丞亘乇睾爻賵賳丕賳賴兀賵噩丿毓丕賱賲賮賷賴丨賷丕丞賵賮賷賴乇賵丨賮賷賴爻賷賵賱丞賮賷賴鬲賲丕賵噩賵鬲賲丕夭噩
亘賷賳賱賱毓丕賱賲丕賱賲丕丿賷孬賳丕卅賷丕鬲鬲禺鬲賱賮毓賳賴毓丕乇囟賮賷賴丕丕賱賮賱爻賮丞丕賱賲丕丿賷丞 .
賮賲孬賱丕賸
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳丿賴丕丕賱毓賯賱丕賱賲丨囟亘乇睾爻賵賳毓賳丿賴丕賱丨丿爻
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳丿賴丕丕賱鬲丨賱賷賱毓賳丿賴丕賱廿丿乇丕賰毓賳丿賴丕丕賱毓賱賲丕賱賲噩乇丿毓賳丿賴丕賱毓丕賱賲丕賱賲鬲毓賷賳
毓賳丿丕賱賲丕丿賷丞丕賱丕賲鬲丿丕丿丕賱賲賰丕賳賷毓賳丿賴丕賱鬲賲丕夭噩貙丕賱廿賲鬲丿丕丿丕賱夭賲丕賳賷
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳丿賴丕丕賱賰賲毓賳丿賴丕賱賰賷賮
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳丿賴丕丕賱氐賱亘毓賳丿賴丕賱爻丕卅賱
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳賴丕丕賱賲賵噩賵丿毓賳丿賴丕賱氐丕卅乇丕賱匕賷賷賰賵賳
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳丿賴丕丕賱賲鬲賯胤毓毓賳丿賴丕賱賲爻鬲賲乇
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳丿賴丕丕賱亘乇丕睾賲丕鬲賷 " 丕賱卮賷亍丕賱匕賷賷賯丿乇毓賱賶丕賱鬲毓丕賲賱丕賱禺丕乇噩賷 " 毓賳丿賴丕賱丨丿爻兀賵丕賱氐賵賮賷兀賷賷爻鬲禺丿賲丕賱丨丿爻賮賷鬲毓丕賲賱賲毓丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賲毓丕賱兀夭賱賷丞賲毓丕賱噩賵賴乇丕賱丿丕禺賱賷賱賱兀卮賷丕亍賵賱賷爻鬲毓丕賲賱禺丕乇噩賷 .
丕賱賲丕丿賷丞毓賳丿賴丕賲噩鬲賲毓賲睾賱賯毓賳丿賴賲噩鬲賲毓賲賮鬲賵丨
毓賳丿丕賱賲丕丿賷丞丕賱廿賲鬲孬丕賱賱賱賯賵丕賳賷賳賵丕賱兀毓乇丕賮賴賷鬲丨丿丿賰賱卮賷亍 . 毓賳丿賴鬲噩丕賵夭丕賱兀毓乇丕賮賵丕賱賯賵丕賳賷賳
毓賳丿丕賱賲丕丿賷丞賯丕賳賵賳丕賱囟乇賵乇丞丕賱禺丕乇噩賷賱賱亘卮乇丕賱毓丕丿賷賷賳 . 毓賳丿賴賯丕賳賵賳丕賱丨丿爻丕賱丿丕禺賱賷賱賱賳禺亘丞 .
禺鬲丕賲丕賸
丕賱賱丕賮鬲賮賷賮賱爻賮丞亘乇睾爻賵賳丕賳賴賰丕賳毓賱賶毓賰爻丕賱鬲胤賵賷乇賷賷賳亘丕賱賰丕賲賱亘丿兀賷丐賵賱丕賱鬲胤賵乇鬲兀賵賷賱乇賵丨賷賮賷賵賯鬲賰丕賳兀賳氐丕乇賳馗乇賷丞丕賱鬲胤賵乇毓賳丿賴賲鬲賮丕爻賷乇賲賷賰丕賳賷賰賷丞丌賱賷丞賲丕丿賷丞氐賱亘丞
亘賷賳賲丕賰丕賳賴賵賷賯賵賱丕賳兀氐賱丕賱鬲胤賵乇賴賵鈥� 丕賳丿賮丕毓丞丨賷賵賷丞" 賴匕賴丕賱廿賳丿賮丕毓丞丕賳胤賱賯鬲賲賳卮毓賵乇賲毓賷賳兀賵亘丕賱兀丨乇賶賲賳賲丕賮賵賯丕賱卮毓賵乇
賵丕賱卮毓賵乇毓賳丿賴賴賵乇賵丨賱賰賳賴賱丕賷爻鬲禺丿賲賰賱賲丞乇賵丨兀亘丿丕賸 .
賷賯賵賱丕賳賴匕丕丕賱鬲胤賵乇 " 丕賱丕賳丿賮丕毓丞丕賱丨賷賵賷丞" 賷兀鬲賷亘卮賰賱賲亘丕睾鬲賮賷毓丕賱賲賲睾丕賲乇賷禺鬲乇毓賵賷毓丕丿丕禺鬲乇丕毓賴丿賵賳賴賵丕丿丞貙
亘乇睾爻賵賳賷賯乇亘賵噩賵丿 " 賯賵賾丞禺賱賾丕賯丞"
-賯賵賶丕賱賱賴貙丕賱鬲氐賲賷賲丕賱匕賰賷- 賱賰賳賴賵賱丕賷賯賵賱丕賱賱賴
賷賮賵賱賴賳丕賰賯賵賾丞禺賱賾丕賯丞兀賳卮兀鬲丕賱賰賵賳丨鬲賶鬲賰賵賳匕丕鬲賮毓賱丨丕爻賲亘鬲胤賵乇丕賱賰丕卅賳丕鬲丕賱丨賷丞賵賷丐賰丿賮賷丕賱賵賯鬲賳賮爻賴丕賳賴孬賲丞賮賷賴匕丕丕賱賰賵賳賲丕賴賵兀毓賱賶賲賳丕賱毓賯賱賮丕毓鬲亘乇丕賱毓賯賱賲噩乇丿丌賱賰賱賱賮毓賱賱丕兀賰孬乇賵賱丕兀賯賱賵亘賳賮爻丕賱賵賯鬲賰丕賳賷毓鬲亘乇丕賱賵噩丿丕賳/ 丕賱丨丿爻賴賵丕賱賯丕丿乇賵丨丿賴毓賱賶賮賴賲丕賱丨賷丕丞賵毓賱賶廿丿乇丕賰丕賱兀卮賷丕亍丕賱賲鬲睾賷賷乇丞賵賴匕丕賲丕兀爻賲丕賴 " 丕賱丿賷賲賵賲丞丕賱夭賲賳賷丞"
賵賴賳丕賷賯鬲乇亘亘乇睾爻賵賳賲賳賰丕賳鬲丕賱匕賷亘賳賯丿賴丕賱毓賱賲賷賰丕賳賷賯賵賱兀賳丕兀丐賲賳亘丕賱賱賴亘賵噩丿丕賳賷 /亘丕賱丨丿爻賱丕亘丕賱毓賯賱 .

Greg

649 reviews103 followers

August 8, 2007

Bergson's thesis is that Darwinian and Lamarkian evolution are only half the story and that there is a creative urge inherent in life that defines the direction of evolution. It is distinguished from Creationism in that his system does not posit and eschaton or final perfect form, nor an external agent (God).

It has some similarity with biologist Rupert Sheldrake's theory of morphic fields. In his theory, there is an energy field (as yet undetected by modern physics) that controls the shape of organic molecules, i.e., one protein is shaped one way and the same collection of atoms gets shaped another way under the same pH and temperature.

Aldous Huxley mentions Bergson's theory of consciousness several times in his writings. Bergson thinks that consciousness pervades everything, and that intellect serves as a filter that presents only what is comprehensible to mental categories. This has several implications. One is the possibility for a monistic metaphysic. The other is that it leaves open the possibility of perceiving an alternate reality (what excited Huxley).

Chapter 3 is about his metaphysics, which are not very clearly expressed. There appear to be avenues unexplored by him. What are the consequences of matter being infused with consciousness? Magic? Why is it that intellect and geometrical thinking is what produces objects in perception? What is the mechanism.

What does have value is his theory that chaos is not the absence of repeatability, but is a stochastic process that can be understood as an aggregate of individual "wills." This is used to support his vital theory of evolution. That each organism "wills" its variation in seemingly random fashion, but at a higher order, it produces the regularity of genera.

Chapter 4 is a critique of various philosophic systems after establishing his "cinematographic" theory of perception. His basic point is that matter is in continual flux, yet we are only able to perceive it as a sequence of discrete states, hence the illusion of permanence.

philosophy

Xander

459 reviews184 followers

March 4, 2020

Creative Evolution (1907) is arguably Henri Bergson鈥檚 most matured and comprehensive account of reality. In it, he draws heavily from his earlier works Time and Free Will (1889) and Matter and Memory (1896), and intertwines his views on time, space, matter and mind with the (then new) evolutionary biology. The result is a very original framework with which to view the world.

Bergson won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1927, and this is a very important landmark. It shows Bergson鈥檚 artistic talents and his philosophical genius. But it is important in another sense: Bergson was no real philosopher 鈥� at least in the sense philosophy is usually understood 鈥� but more of an artist. Perhaps, some might even call him a secular theologian. Anyway, if you have to compare Bergson to some predecessor, Plotinus comes to mind. Why? Plotinus drew from Plato, Neo-Platonism, Stoicism and a myriad other source, and drew up a total worldview in which the concept of 鈥榠mmanence鈥� was all-important.

Likewise, Bergson draws up a whole philosophy, borrowing ideas of Descartes, Kant, modern physics and modern biology to synthesize a grand worldview, ultimately based on the notion of 鈥榠ntuition鈥�. Both Plotinus and Bergson place a high value on the immanence of the world 鈥� reality is that which immediately shows itself to us 鈥� intuitively, so to speak. All attempts to describe, explain or conceptualize reality leads to distorted, disfigured views of the world.

There are major differences between Plotinus and Bergson, though. The most important being that Plotinus 鈥� steeped as he was in Ancient philosophy 鈥� recognized the gradualness of reality. The Whole of reality 鈥� i.e. God 鈥� is perfectly immanent, but all of its parts partake in this whole, leading to a ladder of reality, on which mankind is placed somewhere between dead matter and God. We are gifted with mind, yet we also are partly material.

For Bergson, this gradualness of reality is the product of a habitual illusion. Most of the history of philosophy (and certainly all of the old debates) is riddled with this illusion of gradualness. Plato鈥檚 theory of Forms and Aristotle鈥檚 First Mover are postulates, necessary because reality is conceived to be immutable. Greek philosophy, as modern science, saw itself confronted with a world that is composed of moments, states and forms. These are simply parts 鈥� the mind immediately leads us to the concept of a whole 鈥� a series of moments, a sequence of states, an order of forms. It is these series that were (and are) conceptualized as eternal Forms, Prime Movers or mathematical equations.

All of the old philosophical debates are then reduced to mere pseudo-problems, as products of the habits of our mind. Understanding our mind properly would then lead to dissolving of all these problems. It is this that Bergson attempts in all of his works. Or rather: it is his main aim. It is in this domain that Bergson鈥檚 philosophy is truly unique, impressive and baffling.

With the risk of oversimplifying Bergson鈥檚 theories, this is Bergson鈥檚 account of the world.

Drawing on Descartes鈥� dualism, Bergson claims there is matter and mind. Matter is the objective world that confronts us during our conscious life. Mind is our intuitive sense of reality. Usually, philosophers would attempt to place perception and/or intellect in the sphere of the mind. Not for Bergson. He claims perception is simply the prolongation of material movements 鈥� tendencies. Tendencies of what? Of our bodies. Our bodies are peculiar, in the sense that they are material objects, yet also are intrinsically connected to our inner consciousness. This is what distinguishes us from dead matter, plants, and animals.

Seeing as there are consciousness and physical bodies, our lives come with two aspects. Normally, most of the time, we are simply physical bodies, solely occupied with practical life. We perceive, we act. Scientists study the human body and can describe how physical movements transmit energies to our sense apparatus, which relates these impulses to our brains. Our brains then send out transmissions as a result of these movements. In short: our brain is the centre, receiving and sending messages to our peripheral bodily locations. For Bergson, the human body 鈥� as indeed the bodies of all living organisms 鈥� is nothing but a sensory-motor system.

But, as said, human beings have consciousness. That is, we are not simply machines operating on the principle of stimulus-response. And so it is with most 鈥榟igher鈥� animals. Apart from perception, we have intellect. This is the ability to deduce and induce new data from given data. Ultimately, these rest on geometrical and logical principles, which themselves are the foundation of both our common sense grasp of reality and our scientific theories (like the conceptions of space and time in physics). With Bergson, intellect is placed firmly in the bodily organism.

To explain both perception and intellect, Bergson draws on evolutionary biology 鈥� these faculties are adaptations of organisms that allow for goal-directed behaviour. In short, he uses a functionalist approach when explain both our perception and intellect.

So how does it answer the above mentioned philosophical problems? Well it doesn鈥檛鈥� yet. These philosophical debates and problems (mostly metaphysical) are the results of this biological way of thinking. We are animals, living social lives. We use language to communicate with others; language uses symbols that refer to particular objecting and things in the world; and this mechanism forces a particular, physical way of thinking on us. We conceptualize reality as a collection of parts (objects, things) and their relations, and express it to others. While this worldview has obvious evolutionary value 鈥� otherwise we wouldn鈥檛 think this way and hadn鈥檛 changed the world so profoundly 鈥� it is a distorted view of the world. It tricks us into believing we have perceived reality, yet the metaphysical implications of this worldview should warn us (or have warned us) about the illusoriness of this approach.

For Bergson, this material world is simply a natural product of evolution.

The task of the philosopher is to deconstruct it, and to unravel the true way of the world. When we talk about consciousness, or life, we are moving in a totally different region. We should un-learn the intellectual way of viewing the world 鈥� of chopping it up into infinite collections of moments, states, and forms. In Time and Free Will (1889), Bergson attempted to show that psychologists look at human consciousness as a collection of quantitative states, while it truly is a continuous flow of qualitative states. Measuring, or even conceptualizing any state artificially destroys the continuity, movement and quality of the very thing the psychologist tries to study. Consciousness is duration 鈥� a totally different region from the objective space-time in which the scientist (as well as the common sense person) operates. Or rather, all spatial and temporal ideas are intellectual constructs, attempts at intellectually grasping un-graspable intuitions. E.g. we imagine duration as moments, which can be pictured to ourselves as (an infinite collection of) points on a line. Yet this picture is a geometrical representation of an intuition 鈥� it quantifies a qualitative state.

Likewise, in Matter and Memory (1896), Bergson attempted to show that picturing the world as (infinite) collections of moments, states and forms, is simply the product of the correlation of our consciousness and the material world (including our brains). Scientists and philosophers have debated for ages (and still do) how physical brain states relate to conscious states. There seems to be an unbridgeable chasm between the objects of neuroscience and psychology. Bergson鈥檚 theory is that this is a pseudo-problem, the result of our intellectual way of viewing the world (including ourselves). Intuitively, we experience our body in the here and now. We are (paraphrasing him) a personal entity continuously eating our way into the future. We literally our only here and now, and our whole notion of past and future comes from our memory. That is, we are built to learn from past experiences. This means we adapt ourselves to our current situation based on prior events. Physically, this is simply the formation of tendencies in the brain.

Psychologically, this past does not exist. All we are, is our current (qualitative) state, which itself is a continuously moving intuition. Pure duration. That is, prior states are selected 鈥� based mostly on practical needs, sometimes on speculative desires 鈥� and are immediately fused with our present state. Even this way of putting it stunts the meaning of Bergson: he literally means there is no conscious past. All selected memories are not memories of events as they happened 鈥� they are intrinsically part of the present. The past never comes back, what we believe to be memories of the past, are our present states fusing (selectively) past states with current states, leading to totally new states. In short: consciousness continuously creates states out of current and past experiences.
Similarly, there is no future. Due to the workings of our memory, we form notions of a past, as distinguished from the present. Now, this seems to lead us also towards a future. If I was, and now am, during those past moments, the current 鈥業鈥� was part of the (鈥榤y鈥�) future. But this is an illusion. Just like there is no (conscious) past, there is no (conscious) future. There is simply me, as pure consciousness, experiencing a continuous flow of ever-changing states.

(I am aware of my creaky description of this mechanism 鈥� Bergson is already struggling to express it in a 300 page book, and given my very limited way of expression this only greatens the problem. Once you grasp it, is easy to see who he means鈥�)

And now we have hit upon Bergson鈥檚 deepest insight. There is a dualism between inner consciousness and external materiality. The first is the real of pure duration, continuity, movement; the second is the realm of our brain, physical body, all of Nature. Due to language and social life, we express the second realm in terms of objects and their relations in space-time. Our intellect, so used in viewing the world in this way, internalizes this worldview and intellectualizes our intuitions, so to speak. We quantify qualitative states of consciousness; we transform movement into immobility; we represent time and movement as (infinite collections of) points in space-time.
So far, all we have dealt with are Bergson鈥檚 main theories from Time and Free Will (1889) and Matter and Memory (1896). What does this have to do with Creative Evolution (1907)? Well, like I mentioned at the beginning of this review: it is his magnum opus. He takes all of his earlier ideas and synthesizes them with evolutionary biology.

The biologist 鈥� assuming the unprovable notion that he has the same intellectual and perceptive faculties as his fellow human beings 鈥� falls into the same trap as the physicist, psychologist and common sense person. He studies living organisms. Life is a central concept here: What distinguishes living organisms from dead matter? He will explain this in terms of biochemical processes, and trace this line of development back into the remote past. Really, life is nothing but the active collection of energy to transform it into something new.

The plant collects energy from the sun, carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and water from the soil, in order to produce carbohydrates. It is nothing but a transformation (with an emphasis on form) of energies. This type of living is rather basic. In the past, certain organisms developed ways to outsource this type of living (to plants) and to eat the organisms (plants) that transform energies. So animals eat plants to collect energy, in order to produce movement (to collect energy, etc.). Now, this leads to organisms competing for resources 鈥� plants for sunlight and water, animals for plants or other animals 鈥� so an arms race of protective apparatus. And this leads to better weaponry to best these protections. Etc.

In short, we see life developing from stationary plant life to moving animal life. Sensory-motor systems become a necessity for animals, guided under the principle of natural selection. Now it starts to pay to interfere with goal-setting, flexibility becomes a premium, resulting ever higher specialization of intellectual capabilities. In short: life branches out, organisms find unique ways of adapting themselves to their ever-changing environment, and intellect becomes one of these adaptations. An ever expanding intellect, due to ever expanding cortical specialization, leads, ultimately, to man.

Bergson claims that man is unique, of a different kind, compared to all other organisms. While instinct, perception and intellect are gradual properties, possessed by many organisms in some way or other, it is only in man that life manifests itself, to itself. That is, man is himself a state of this ever-flowing, continuous line of development 鈥� a state of life 鈥� but at the same time he is able to grasp this way of being intuitively. Other animals, supposedly, lack this capacity. The horse might be intelligent in remembering his care taker and the times it is fed, but it doesn鈥檛 intuitively grasp that it鈥檚 alive. Man does.

Now, we can wrap up all of Bergson鈥檚 theories rather easily. Just like (pure) consciousness is a totally different region from the material world, so life is a totally different region from the natural world. For Bergson, life is a primordial impulsion, given to dead matter 鈥� enlivening matter, so to speak 鈥� which then sets of a continuous ever-flowing chain of explosions, moving endlessly in all directions. This leads to the endless tree of life, of which we are simply one state.

The biologist 鈥� still driven by the same sort of essentialist thinking of Aristotle or formalistic thinking of Plato 鈥� artificially chops up this tree of life in his pursuit of distinct varieties and species. He looks for essences and static forms in qualitative, ever-moving forms of life. What is a Siberian tiger? When does an organism qualify to be a Siberian tiger? What are the essential traits an organism has to have to qualify as a Siberian tiger? These questions, ultimately, are unanswerable, since they simply depend on our own linguistic conventions. Just like the quip that 鈥業Q is what the IQ test measures鈥� we can say 鈥楢 Siberian tiger is what the biologist decides to measure鈥�.

------------------------------------------------
(final paragraphs continue in comment section.)

Drenda

39 reviews6 followers

Read

April 25, 2019

Henri Bergson is perhaps the most famous of the philosophers who fall under the label of vitalism, whose most basic tenet is that the procedures of science, dealing with material objects, is inappropriate to living organisms and especially that aspect of life called consciousness. Since most of the academics in the Western tradition think otherwise, it is fitting, I think, that much of Creative Evolution should be taken up with why they do so. I cannot sum up Bergson's premise better than this pivotal paragraph from CE:

'Originally, we think only in order to act. Our intellect has been cast in the mold of action. Speculation is a luxury, while action is necessary. Now, in order to act, we begin by proposing an end; we make a plan, then we go on to the detail of the mechanism which will bring it to pass. This latter operation is possible only if we know what we can reckon on. We must therefore have managed to extract resemblances from nature, which enable us to anticipate the future. Thus we must, consciously or unconsciously, have made of the use of the law of causality. Moreover, the more sharply the idea of efficient causality is defined in our minds, the more it takes the form of mechanical causality. And this scheme, in its turn, is the more mathematical according as it expresses a more rigorous necessity. That it why we have only to follow the bent of our mind to become mathematicians.' (p. 36)

In other words, we just think that way. Humans need to be efficient in obtaining the deer and avoiding the lion, and those same patterns lead to the mechanistic, scientific viewpoint.

However, Bergson points out that this method, that of the intellect and science, is not the only method of coping with the overabundance of stimuli that is our world. Within the evolution of life, instinct is the other path, one that as far as efficiency is concerned matches the intellectual faculty. Bergson contradicts the somewhat easy to accept notion that intellect builds on instinct, the more advanced building upon the more primitive. Instead Bergson sees these two paths as parallel but diverging extremely early in the history of animal life. One, instinct, pushes toward total assimilation with the object of their focus, its members specialized for the activity they are performing. The other, intellect, is removed from the object, aligned with it only conceptually. It is a far less perfect connection, and partly for that reason, open to changing direction when the context changes. The essential function of instinct is interpenetration, of intellect problem solving. Obviously the angle of its trajectory is toward flexibility and that is what the intellect can supply. However while Bergson is the champion of the 'vital' element in evolution, he is also deeply aware of the energy involved in solving the problems instinct has settled. Too often, that most cogitating animal, mankind, falls back into modes of thought that are conventional and near automatic. Intellect, by itself, can never break out of the already known except by an exceptional act of will.

The divergence of the intellect and instinct bifurcated a momentum that is the simple, effusive flow of life. By definition life is the opposite of stasis, of quiescence, and life on the move is explosive for Bergson. Movement has to entail choice, being here rather than there, such that the humblest organism with the ability and necessity of movement, demonstrates a spark of consciousness. Consciousness is nearly coterminal with life, and for the moving organism, it is. Bergson most basically believes that while the scientific worldview is obviously not dealing with the real but only the efficient, it is no serious error when concerned with the material world. But beyond the unbridgeable gap that separates life and matter, there is another huge gap for Bergson at the threshold where life moves or it doesn't: plants seem mired in the soil that contains them. Being photosynthesizers, they provide the energy that allows other life to break away into mobility.

So now that we know why most of us think the way we do most of the time and why (most) scientists want to think mechanistically all the time, what do we have left? Most obviously, all that 'stuff' the intellect charted through in the first place. The world is very complex, especially when an organism starts moving around in it, and that is why coping mechanisms like instinct and intellect were called for. And one reason why life is so complex is that has a history, as Bergson says, it endures. Duration is very different from the time of the intellect. Scientists attempts to make time static by using frozen moments which she can contemplate and arrange with elements already known. They operate with the principle that 'all is given'. So while we can't think any other way than with time as segmented ( 'intellect solidifies everything it touches' p. 38), we live time as a flow and sense the possibility of real change. If time truly flows, and we leave behind the frozen moments of the intellect, then events don't cause an effect, they interpenetrate, like a glass of water given drops of dye. Scientists like to present one artificially segmented section of time as being totally determined by the segment just before. This can't be true if time is fluid. For one thing, an event touches that which comes as well as what came before. Think of a fisherman walking upstream- he influences the water not only behind him but ahead of him as well. And then consider what lies behind: if time flows, the ripple effect from life's movement is incalculably vast. Think of a newborn who begins life already with the drag of his genetic history. With the passage of time, each experience both influences and is influenced by everything around it. The effect is almost exponential when one considers each ripple interpenetrating with the field around it, producing new ripple fields as courses meet. And while the medium of our lived experience may be best described as fluid, it is not weak. This long history that every human has, while not always there in awareness, can pounce back with a vengeance in the form of intense memories, or we can bring a past episode of our life front and center, to reconsider it, rejoice over it, or mourn it. No wonder Proust and Bergson are so often discussed together.

Indeed, the presence of art is one of the proofs that mankind is still capable of at least glimpsing that stream of life which is forbidden to the intellect. It is hard to deny that there is a different kind of knowledge which the great poets provide, that they supply suggestions of that whole through which the intellect can only map a course. The artist reconnects with life through a sympathy with his model that is not unlike the connection of an organism driven instinctively toward its object. In fact, the sympathy the artist exhibits is a latent spark of an instinctual relationship with the world that the human species polished with the tools of disinterestedness and reflection, tools of the intellect. Bergson calls this kind of knowledge intuition. I'm not sure that this origin story for intuition is totally necessary to appreciate the thrust of Bergson's intent, but it is a word for that which stimulates change, for what is insightful and creative. Bergson is sure we all feel such explosive moments at times, and wants to pull this recognition out of us. Intuition is in place whenever someone suggests a new course to an established system or makes real changes to a theory, whenever the already known needs change, however hard that may be.

For me, Bergson is a very fecund writer who provides templates for viewing many other thinkers. Pete Gunter, who wrote the introduction to my edition of Creative Evolution, rightly points out that much of Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions can be pulled from the pages of the former. Normal science as a convention that directs research, everyone happily confirming the niceties of the current theory-this is the work of the intellect attempting to expend as little energy as possible. But with some interruptions, the sleep of the already known is awaken with a bang and a revolution takes place, usually brought about by the intuitive insights of a newcomer to the field. So even science demonstrates the creative changes which its procedures tend to deny.

Colin McGuinn is one of the more prominent, current philosophers defending consciousness as more than just brain function. In 2018, I reviewed his 'The Mysterious Flame: Conscious Minds in a Material World' with this summary: the human brain has evolved to solve problems in space, with linguistic logic an added twist, and and that kind of brain does not have the ability to think in such a way that it can conceive of a piece of meat providing consciousness. Old hat for anyone who has read Creative Evolution.

I often thought of Heidegger while reading Bergson: their distrust of science as a path to the real is very similar, as well as their obvious contempt for humankind's inclination to fall back into habit and convention. (Bergson is much more light-hearted about it, though, a light-hearted buoyancy something I can't help attributing to him. Heidegger would define the opposite end of that scale. He calls mankind 'inauthentic' when falling into the conventional, Bergson more mourns the entropy which is necessarily there.) Bergson's working out of the attributes of the intellect, as that which allows humankind to maneuver the world through distant observation and conceptual manipulation, provides a framework for viewing so many critics of the Western tradition that came later. I think of Foucault who so emphasized the sedimentation of appraisal, the remote overview of prisoners and citizens, as the hallmark of the nineteenth century. Bergson maintains that this attempt to bring everything under the purview of the intellect is endemic to mankind and the only hope we can entertain is barricading it at the entrance to life and consciousness. As Foucault, for one, and Horkheimer and Adorno for another, show, that has not been too successful for some time.

I believe one of the most important of Bergson's legacies is his elaboration of the astonishingly complex history we are embedded in with his sense of duration. The influences that reach us have so many histories of their own that the field of our experience becomes so complex that 'not even a superhuman intelligence' (p. 5) would be able to predict a future outcome. Walter Benjamin demonstrates a similar sense of history while examining the architecture of the nineteenth century in "The Arcades Project". His translators ( Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin) write:

"The transcendence of the conventional book form would go together, in this case, with the blasting apart of pragmatic historicism-grounded, as this always is, on the premise of a continuous and homogeneous temporality. Citation and commentary might then be perceived as intersecting at a thousand different angles, setting up vibrations across the epochs of recent history, so as to effect the "cracking open of natural teleology." And all this would unfold through the medium of hints or "blinks'--a discontinuous presentation deliberately opposed to traditional modes of argumentation." (p. vi)

The subject in the midst of Bergson's duration is very like the reader that Terry Eagleton describes while summarizing Reception Theory:

"Reading is not a straightforward linear movement, a merely cumulative affair: our initial speculations generate a frame of reference within which to interpret what comes next, but what comes next may retrospectively transform our original understanding, highlighting some features of it and backgrounding others. As we read on we shed assumptions, revise beliefs, make more and more complex inferences and anticipations; each sentence opens up a horizon which is confirmed, challenged or undermined by the next. We read backwards and forwards simultaneously, predicting and recollecting...". Literary Theory, p.77

mohab samir

430 reviews391 followers

July 18, 2022

賷亘丿賵亘乇噩爻賵賳賲鬲兀孬乇丕亘鬲賷丕乇丕賱賰丕賳胤賷丞丕賱賲丨丿孬丞賮賶夭賲丕賳賴賵賱賰賳亘兀氐丕賱丞賮賱爻賮賷丞賲賳胤乇丕夭賰丕賳胤賳賮爻賴丨賷孬賷亘丿兀丕賴賲賰鬲亘賴亘廿賷囟丕丨丕賱鬲賲丕賴賶亘賷賳丕賱賮賱爻賮丞丕賱毓賱賲賷丞賵丕賱賮賱爻賮丞丕賱賲丨囟丞賰賲丕丨丕賵賱賰丕賳胤賲賳賯亘賱賴鬲禺賷賱賮賱爻賮丞毓賱賲賷丞鬲毓鬲賲丿賮賶賲賳胤賯賴丕毓賱賶丕禺鬲亘丕乇賲丕賴賵賲賵噩賵丿听丨賷孬鬲賲孬賱丕賱鬲賲丕賴賶亘賷賳丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲丕賱馗丕賴乇賷丞丕賱丌賱賷丞賵丕賱毓賲賱賷丕鬲丕賱毓賯賱賷丞丕賱賲賳胤賯賷丞 . 賵賯丿爻毓賶賴賷噩賱賲賳亘毓丿賴丕賱賶鬲卮賷賷丿氐乇丨賲賳胤賯賶賮賶丕賱丕爻丕爻賱賱賮賰乇丕賱毓賱賲賶 .
丕賱丕丕賳亘乇噩爻賵賳賷鬲噩賴丕賱賶丕賱亘丨孬毓賳毓賱丞匕賱賰丕賱鬲賲丕賴賶賲賳禺賱丕賱賳賯丿丕賱賮賱爻賮丕鬲丕賱丿賵噩賲丕卅賷丞兀丨丕丿賷丞丕賱賲賳馗賵乇賮賶噩賵丕賳亘賴丕丕賱賲禺鬲賱賮丞賰賳賯丿丕賱賲丕丿賷丞丕賱賲賷賰丕賳賷賰賷丞賵丕賱鬲噩乇賷亘賷丞賵丕賱賮乇丿賷丞賵兀賮賰丕乇賴丕毓賳丕賱夭賲丕賳賵丕賱賲賰丕賳賵賰匕賱賰賮賶賳賯丿賴賱賱賮賰乇丕賱賲孬丕賱賶丕賱睾丕卅賶賵丕賱賲賷鬲丕賮賷夭賷賯賶听 .
賵賷毓鬲賲丿亘乇噩爻賵賳賮賶賳賯丿賴賲賳馗賵乇丕噩丿賱賷丕賵賲鬲胤賵乇丕賷丨丕賵賱丕賳賷賯鬲乇亘亘賴賯丿乇丕賱丕賲賰丕賳賲賳賲賳馗賵乇丕賱丨賷丕丞丕賱鬲賶鬲毓賲賱亘卮賰賱賲鬲氐賱毓賱賶禺賱賯賱丨馗丕鬲賮乇丿賷丞賵賮乇賷丿丞賮賶賲囟賲賵賳賴丕賱賰賳賴丕賱丕賷賲賰賳丕賳鬲噩鬲夭兀賲賳丕賱丨賷丕丞丕賱丕亘卮賰賱鬲噩乇賷丿賶賲鬲毓爻賮賮賶丕賱賮賰乇丕賵賱丨馗丞丕賱賲毓乇賮丞丕賵賮賶亘賳賷丞丕賱毓賱賲丕賱賳馗乇賶 . 賵賴匕丕丕賱廿噩鬲夭丕亍 - 丕賱匕賶賴賵賲賳胤亘賷毓丞丕賱毓賯賱丕賱毓賲賱賷丞 - 賴賵丕賱爻亘亘賮賶丕賱丿賵乇丕賱匕賶賷賯毓賮賷賴丕賱毓賯賱賳賮爻賴毓賳丿丿乇丕爻丞丕氐賱丕賱馗丕賴乇丞賵賲丕賴賷鬲賴丕 . 賰賲丕毓賳丿亘丨孬賴賮賶賲丕賴賷丞丕賱賵噩賵丿亘卮賰賱毓丕賲賵賲賷鬲丕賮賷夭賷賯賶 .
賵賱丕賷睾賮賱丕賱賰丕鬲亘毓賳鬲丨匕賷乇賴賲賳賴匕丕丕賱賮氐賱胤賵丕賱賲爻賷乇丞丕賱賰鬲丕亘丕賱匕賶鬲賳丕賵賱賮賷賴丕賱鬲胤賵乇賰兀爻丕爻丕賵賲亘丿兀丕賳胤賵賱賵噩賶賷賰賵賳賲爻卅賵賱丕毓賳鬲丿賴賵乇丕賱賵丨丿丞丕賱賲噩乇丿丞丕賱賶丕噩夭丕亍賮賷賰賵賳亘匕賱賰丕賱賲亘丿兀丕賱匕賶賷乇亘胤兀噩夭丕亍丕賱賰賱丕賱賲賮乇丿賵賷賵丨丿賴賮賶氐賵乇毓賷賳賷丞鬲鬲胤賵乇亘丿賵乇賴丕賵鬲賳賯爻賲賵賱賰賳賴丕鬲馗賱賲鬲丨丿丞賲賳丨賷孬丕賱賲丕賴賷丞 . 賵鬲賰賵賳賰賱丕賱兀卮賷丕亍賮賶氐賷乇賵乇丞賵賱丕鬲賵噩丿丕亘丿丕亘匕丕鬲賴丕丕匕丕賲丕賯賵乇賳鬲亘丕賱賰賱丕賱匕賶賷卮賲賱賴丕賵鬲賰賵賳賴賵丕賯毓賷丕听貙丕賱丕丕賳賴丕鬲賰賵賳丕卮賷丕亍賲丨丿丿丞亘丕賱賳爻亘丞賱賰賱賲丕賴賵賲丨丿賵丿丕賶亘丕賱賳爻亘丞賱賰賱賲丕賴賵賲卮賲賵賱賵賲鬲囟賲賻賳賰噩夭亍賲賳丕賱賰賱賵賰賱賲丕賷賳胤賵賶賮賶賲丕賴賷鬲賴毓賱賶賲亘丿兀賲丨丿丿賱賱賵噩賵丿賵賱丕賷賰賵賳丨賷賳賴丕丕賱賰賱賲毓乇賵賮丕賸丕賵賲丨丿丿丕 . 賮丕賱丕噩夭丕亍賰賲丕丕賱賰賱丕賱匕賶賷卮賲賱賴丕賷賰賵賳賰賱賲賳賴丕匕賵氐賵乇丞賲丨丿丿丞賮賶賱丨馗丞賲丨丿丿丞賱賰賳賱丕賷賲賰賳丕賳鬲賯鬲胤毓賴匕賴丕賱氐賵乇丞賲賳鬲爻賱爻賱鬲胤賵乇賴丕丕賵賲賳氐賷乇賵乇丞丕賱夭賲賳丕賱鬲賶賱丕鬲賰賱毓賳丕賱毓賲賱毓賱賶鬲胤賵乇馗丕賴乇賴丕亘賳丕亍毓賱賶鬲胤賵乇賲囟賲賵賳賴丕賵賲丨鬲賵丕賴丕 .
賵禺賱丕賱賴匕賴丕賱賲爻賷乇丞丕賱鬲胤賵乇賷丞賱賱賵噩賵丿丕賱鬲賶賷鬲賳丕賵賱賴丕亘乇噩爻賵賳亘賳賯丿丕賱賲賷鬲丕賮賷夭賷賯丕丕賱賰賱丕爻賷賰賷丞賵丕賱賲丨丿孬丞毓賱賶丕賱爻賵丕亍賲丨丕賵賱丕丕賱毓孬賵乇毓賱賶丕賱乇丕亘胤丕賱禺賮賶丕賱匕賶賷噩毓賱丕賱丨賯賷賯丞賲賳賯爻賲丞丿丕禺賱賰賱賲賳賴賲丕賲賲丕賷爻丕毓丿賴毓賱賶丕馗賴丕乇丕賱噩丕賳亘丕賱鬲賱賮賷賯賶賱賰賱兀賷丿賷賵賱賵噩賷丕鬲丿毓賶賱賳賮爻賴丕丕賲鬲賱丕賰丕賱鬲氐賵乇丕賱賰丕賲賱賱賱丨賯賷賯丞丕賱賲胤賱賯丞 . 賵亘匕賱賰賷賮氐賱丕賱賰丕鬲亘亘賷賳丕賱賲賳賴噩丕賱毓賱賲賶賵丕賱賲賳賴噩丕賱賮賱爻賮賶賲賳噩丕賳亘丕賱丕丕賳賴賷賯乇亘囟乇賵乇丞丕毓丕丿丞丕賱乇亘胤賵丕賱鬲賵賮賷賯亘賷賳賴賲丕亘卮賰賱睾賷乇丿賵噩賲丕卅賶 . 賮丕賱丨賯賷賯丞丿丕卅賲丕賸賲鬲胤賵乇丞賵賱丕賷馗賴乇賲毓賳丕賴丕丕賱丕賰孬乇鬲胤賵乇丕丕賱丕亘丕賱噩丿賱丕賱丿丕卅賲亘賷賳賵噩賴鬲賶賳馗乇賴丕丕賱賲鬲囟丕丿鬲賷賳亘丨賷孬賷賳亘睾賶賱賴匕丕丕賱噩丿賱丕賳賷乇亘胤賵噩賴鬲賶丕賱賳馗乇亘乇亘丕胤賵孬賷賯毓賳丿丕賱賳馗乇賮賶兀賲乇丕賱丨賯賷賯丞丕賱賲胤賱賯丞貙兀賵丕賱賮氐賱亘賷賳賰賱乇兀賶丕匕丕丕禺鬲氐丕賱賳馗乇亘丿乇丕爻丞賱丨馗丞賲噩乇丿丞鬲鬲亘毓賴 .
賵禺賱丕賱賴匕丕丕賱賳賯丕卮賵丕賱噩丿賱丕賱丿丕卅乇亘賷賳賵噩賴鬲賶賳馗乇丕賱賲丕丿賷丞賵丕賱賲孬丕賱賷丞貙丕賵丕賱丕賱賷丞丕賱賲賷賰丕賳賷賰賷丞賵丕賱睾丕卅賷丞丕賱乇賵丨賷丞貙鬲馗賴乇賲賷鬲丕賮賷夭賷賯丕丕賱丨賷丕丞賰丨賯賷賯丞賵丕丨丿丞賱賴丕賲亘丿丕鬲胤賵乇賶賲鬲夭賳賷毓賲賱毓賱賶丕賳鬲賰賵賳丕賱丨賯賷賯丞賮賶匕丕鬲賴丕兀亘丿賷丞賵賱賰賳賴丕賱丕鬲馗賴乇丕賱丕賮賶丕賱夭賲賳毓賱賶賲乇丕丨賱鬲胤賵乇賷丞賲鬲鬲丕亘毓丞 ( 賱丨馗丕鬲賵丕噩賳丕爻賵丕賮乇丕丿 ) 賵睾賷乇賲爻鬲賯賱丞亘匕丕鬲賴丕賵賷賰賵賳賱賰賱賲賳賴丕囟乇賵乇鬲賴丕丕賱賲胤賱賯丞賵賲毓賳丕賴丕丕賱賳爻亘賶賮賶鬲賰賵賳丕賱丨賯賷賯丞匕丕鬲丕賱賲毓賳賶丕賱賲胤賱賯賵丕賱囟乇賵乇丞丕賱賳爻亘賷丞 (丕賶丿丕禺賱鬲賷丕乇丕賱丨賷丕丞賮賶爻賷賵賱鬲賴賰丿賷賲賵賲丞 ) 貙賰賲丕賷賰賵賳賱賰賱賱丨馗丞賲噩乇丿丞賲賳賱丨馗丕鬲丕賱丨賷丕丞囟乇賵乇鬲賴丕丕賱賳爻亘賷丞賵賲毓賳丕賴丕丕賱賲胤賱賯丕匕丕賳馗乇丕賱賷賴丕賲賳賳賯胤丞賲丨丿丿丞丿丕禺賱賴匕丕丕賱鬲賷丕乇 .
賵賷馗賴乇丕賱賲賷賱丕賱丨賷賵賶賱賱丨賯賷賯丞賰丿賮毓丞賲乇賰夭丞鬲鬲卮鬲鬲賮賶兀噩夭丕亍賲丕丿鬲賴丕賲賲丕賷毓賲賱毓賱賶鬲賰丕孬賮賴丕賮賶兀噩夭丕亍賲丨丿丿丞 ( 賯乇亘丕丕賵亘毓丿丕毓賳丕賱賲乇賰夭 ) 亘賳爻亘賲鬲賮丕賵鬲賴賵鬲馗賱賴匕丕丕賱毓賲賱賷丞賲爻鬲賲乇丞亘丕爻鬲賲乇丕乇丕賱賵噩賵丿貙毓丕賲賱丞毓賱賶鬲丨丿賷丿孬賲鬲胤賵乇兀卮賰丕賱賲丕鬲鬲囟賲賳賴賴匕賴丕賱丨賯賷賯丞賮賶賳馗丕賲听 (賲賳胤賯賶囟賲賳丕賵囟乇賵乇賶賵丕賯毓賷丕賵丨賷賵賶廿胤賱丕賯丕 ) 賲鬲胤賵乇賷毓丕賰爻丕鬲噩丕賴丕賱賮賵囟賶賵丕賱毓卮賵丕卅賷丞賵丕賱賱丕賲賳胤賯賷丞丕賱匕賶鬲爻賰賱賴丕賱賲丕丿丞丕賱賲噩乇丿丞賰賲丕丿丞兀乇爻胤賵 .听
賵鬲賰賵賳丕賱丨賷丕丞禺賱賯賵鬲胤賵乇賵賳賲賵賲囟胤乇丿賱胤亘賷毓丞丕賱賲丕丿丞賮丨賷孬鬲亘丨孬丕賱賲丕丿丞毓賳胤乇賷賯賱禺賮囟丕賱胤丕賯丞鬲亘丨孬丕賱丨賷丕丞毓賳乇賮毓賴丕賵賮賶丨賷賳鬲賰賵賳丨乇賰丞丕賱賲丕丿丞賱丕卮毓賵乇賷丞賵賱丕廿乇丕丿賷丞賮丕賳丨乇賰丞丕賱丨賷丕丞卮毓賵乇賷丞 . 賵鬲賳賲賵丕賱丨賷丕丞賮賶丕鬲噩丕賴鬲胤賵乇丕賱廿乇丕丿丞賮賷賰賵賳丕賱丕賳爻丕賳丕賱毓丕賯賱賴賵兀爻賲賶賲丕賳毓乇賮賲賳賲乇丕丨賱鬲胤賵乇丕賱丨賷丕丞貙丨賷孬鬲氐賱丕賱賲丕丿丞賮賶鬲胤賵乇賴丕丕賱賶丕賱賵毓賶賵丕賱廿乇丕丿丞丕賱鬲賶賷賲賰賳丕賳鬲鬲胤賵乇亘匕丕鬲賴丕丕賳噩丕夭丕賱賯賵賱 .
賵丨賷孬鬲賳胤亘毓丕賱賲毓乇賮丞丕賱賲丕丿賷丞丕賱睾乇賷夭賷丞賱賱賰丕卅賳丕鬲賮賶氐賵乇丞毓賯賱賷丞賱丕卮毓賵乇賷丞貙
賷賯賵賲丕賱毓賯賱亘毓丿匕賱賰亘鬲丨賯賷賯賴匕賴丕賱賲毓乇賮丞丕賱賱丕卮毓賵乇賷丞賮賶氐賵乇丞毓賱賲 ( 毓賯賱 ) 賲賵囟賵毓賶 (卮毓賵乇賶)
賵賰賲丕鬲賰賵賳丕賱睾乇賷夭丞賮賶丕鬲噩丕賴賷爻乇賶賲賳丕賱賲丕丿丞丕賱賶丕賱丨賷丕丞 ( 鬲乇賰賷亘囟乇賵乇賶賵賱丕卮毓賵乇賶 ) . 賮廿賳丕賱毓賯賱賴賵丕鬲噩丕賴丕賱丨賷丕賴丕賱賶丕賱賲丕丿丞 ( 鬲丨賱賷賱賵丕毓賶 ) .
賵賮賶丨賷賳賷賲賰賳丕賱鬲賳亘丐亘丕賱馗賵丕賴乇賵乇丿賵丿丕賱賮毓賱丕賱賲丕丿賷丞亘丿賯丞鬲噩乇賷亘賷丞賯賷丕爻賷丞貙賱丕賷賲賰賳丕賱鬲賳亘丐亘丕賱馗賵丕賴乇賵乇丿賵丿丕賱賮毓賱丕賱賳賮爻賷丞丕賱丕賰丨丿爻睾丕賲囟睾賷乇賲丐賰丿 .
賱賯丿賰丕賳鬲丕賱兀賮賰丕乇丕賱鬲賶鬲亘乇賯賮賶丕賱匕賴賳禺賱丕賱丕賱賯乇丕亍丞丨丕爻賲丞賵賲鬲賱丕丨賯丞賵鬲鬲胤賱亘丕賱鬲兀賳賶賮賶乇亘胤賴丕亘賲丕爻亘賯賴丕賵丕胤賱丕賯丕賱毓賳丕賳賱賲丕爻賷賳鬲噩毓賳賴丕賮賷賲丕亘毓丿賵丕賱匕賶賵噩丿鬲賴亘卮賰賱賲卮丕亘賴丕賵賲禺鬲賱賮丕賵賳丕丿乇丕賲丕賱賲兀噩丿賴賮賷賲丕鬲賱賶賲賳氐賮丨丕鬲丕賱賰鬲丕亘賵亘丕賱鬲丕賱賶賷賲賰賳賳賶丕賱賯賵賱亘兀賳賮賱爻賮丞亘乇噩爻賵賳賲賳賴噩賮賰乇賶丨賷賵賶賮賴賵賱賷爻賲賷鬲丕賮賷夭賷賯賷丕丨丿丕賱禺賷丕賱丕賱賲丨囟丕賱匕賶賷賲賰賳賴鬲氐賵乇丕賶卮卅賵賱賵賰丕賳睾賷乇賲賲賰賳貙賵賱丕毓賲賱賷丕賵毓賱賲賷丕丨丿丕賱噩賮丕賮賮賮賶賰賱噩丕賳亘賷購鬲乇賰賳氐賮丕賱丨賯賷賯丞賱氐丕賱丨丕賱賳氐賮丕賱丕禺乇 . 丕賲丕亘乇噩爻賵賳賮賷亘丨孬毓賳乇丐賷丞賲鬲乇丕亘胤丞賱胤乇賮賶丕賱丨賯賷賯丞丕賱賲鬲囟丕丿賷賳賵賱賰賳丕賱賲鬲賰丕賲賱賷賳賵鬲賰賵賳丕賱乇丐賷丞匕丕鬲賴丕鬲胤賵乇賷丞鬲爻賲丨賱賲丕爻賷賱賶賲賳丌賮丕賯毓賱賲賷丞賵賮賱爻賮賷丞丕賳鬲賳丿賲噩賲毓賴丕爻丕賲丨丕賸賰匕賱賰賱賴匕賴丕賱丕賮丕賯丕賱噩丿賷丿丞亘鬲睾賷賷乇乇丐賷鬲賴丕賱賮賱爻賮賷丞匕丕鬲賴丕賮賴賵賱丕賷乇賷丿賱賴丕丕賳鬲賰賵賳丕亘丿賷丞賰賲匕賴亘賳賴丕卅賶賮丕賱賮賷賱爻賵賮丕賱丨賯賱丕賷胤賱亘丕賱賲爻鬲丨賷賱貙賱賰賳賴賷乇賷丿丕賳賷賰賵賳賯丿乇兀賶賲丕賷噩亘乇丐賷鬲賴賮賶毓氐乇賴丕賶丕賳鬲賰賵賳賮賱爻賮鬲賴賱丨馗丞賱賴丕賯賷賲鬲賴丕丕賱賯氐賵賶賮賶鬲胤賵乇鬲丕乇賷禺丕賱賮賱爻賮丞 .

favorites 賮賱爻賮丞

Mahmoud Haggui

225 reviews58 followers

Read

August 18, 2014

creative evolution, a philosophical theory espoused early in the 20th century by Henri Bergson, a French process metaphysician (one who emphasizes becoming, change, and novelty), in his 脡volution cr茅atrice (1907; Creative Evolution). The theory presented an evolution in which a free emergence of the individual intelligence could be recognized. It was thus wholly distinct from previous deterministic hypotheses that were either mechanistic or teleological and represented evolution as conditioned either by existing forces or by future aims. Bergson based his theory on the distinction between matter and the 茅lan vital, or life force, the progress of which he saw as a line continually bifurcating or diverging from its course. The evolution of matter is orderly and geometric; disorder, however, with free and unpredictable creativity, is the effect of the life force on its material surroundings. The argument is largely conducted by means of striking metaphor and analogy: life, for instance, is compared to a wave spreading outward toward a circumference that is broken down at one point only and to an artillery shell from which new shells scatter when it bursts. said the Britannica but I don't know how to describe it accurately.

Jake

15 reviews9 followers

August 10, 2022

You don't need me to tell you about Bergson if you've got this far, but I'll throw this out there, that if you're someone, like me, who's trying to read some tough-toenail 20th century continental philosophy like Heidegger or Husserl, you might find as I did that Bergson is a kind of refreshing encounter with a lot of the same big-time issues like the nature of Time and the limits of Science in a less heady style that helped me feel like I am swimming with and not just getting swept up by the overall flow of where these guys on the continent have been trying to go for the last hundred years or so.

I will say this felt like "Bergson does evolution" in that it's not where I think his foundational and most important arguments are maybe made -- as witnessed by occasional explicit reference to his other works like 'Time and Free Will' and 'Matter and Memory'. But it's apparently the marquis title in terms of reach, and it feels like with Bergson there's maybe no bad place to dive in, so have fun and get wet.

Woke

38 reviews6 followers

July 19, 2019

Many times it's not the complexity of the concepts but the opacity of the style that keeps philosophical discourse confined to ivory towers and dusty bookshelves. Then, every so often, comes along a philosopher who can actually string a few a sentences together and has something to say. Bergson is more than that, and it becomes more clear as the text progresses. It may be kind of slough getting through all the biologism of the first chapter, but hang in there, it get's better. It should be noted, that aside from simply providing much of the metaphysical ground work for In Search of Lost Time, Bergson actually inspired Proust's prose as well.

If you're new to Bergson, I might read Time and Free Will and Matter and Memory first, as this is in ways a divergence and a continuance of those two works.

difference-and-repetition-prep-list french french-theory

Lis

225 reviews

Want to read

August 8, 2010

henry miller states in tropic of capricorn that this book changed his life. i usually jot down books mentioned in other books, and seeing as how the other literary references henry makes (dante, dostoevski) are among my favorites, when he goes on for a few pages talking about the extraordinary impact of a book he barely understood, i figure i better check it out.

Molsa Roja(s)

664 reviews31 followers

August 13, 2023

Terrible decepci贸n con Henri Bergson. La edici贸n de Cactus es absolutamente maravillosa, como siempre: solo por eso se merecer铆an las cinco estrellas. Sin embargo, la obra en s铆 -lo que vengo a comentar, de hecho- me ha dejado m谩s que tibia, fr铆a. La evoluci贸n creadora me parece ser uno de los libros principales de la llamada "filosof铆a de la evoluci贸n", y sin embargo me ha aburrido incre铆blemente. Quiz谩s sea debido a que mis conocimientos actuales sobre vida y evoluci贸n desacreditan gran mayor铆a de sus ideas o apuntes, pero creo que va m谩s all谩: se une quiz谩s al hartazgo que siento por los se帽ores que filosofan mayormente generalizando, aquellos que van siempre a los grandes temas y a los que les encanta recordar cu谩n importante es la inteligencia humana, reafirmando una y otra vez el antropocentrismo. 隆Qu茅 agotamiento! Ni siquiera las nociones de instinto e inteligencia, 茅lan vital me han parecido interesantes. No niego que en su momento pudiera suponer un cambio en la literatura evolutiva, pero s铆 pienso que la filosof铆a puede aportar dif铆cilmente nada a una teor铆a evolutiva de car谩cter cient铆fico, y que el libro de Bergson no ayuda en ese sentido. Sinti贸 claramente la necesidad de hablar del tema, por el cual siente gran inter茅s, pero siento decir que no tiene una aportaci贸n significativa, ni siquiera conceptos relevantes y transponibles a otras 谩reas.

Salma Hasan

67 reviews39 followers

September 13, 2017

John

78 reviews1 follower

November 6, 2024

4.5, review to come maybe later

book-project

Leyre Celada

26 reviews1 follower

March 6, 2025

de ahora en adelante bergsoniana por los siglos de los siglos de una eterna duraci贸n creadora innovadora generadora biom铆stica y deliciosa

Muaz Jalil

318 reviews9 followers

March 8, 2021

It's a fascinating book. Very few philosophers use biology as their vehicle for exposition. His analogies are spot on and thought provoking. If I understand correctly, he discusses early version of emergence principle, where whole is bigger than the sum of parts.

Thomas the reader

362 reviews80 followers

July 16, 2024

Aight, bet. So Bergson's Creative Evolution is straight bussin', no cap. It's like, the whole universe is just out here wildin', no sus. Everything's just on its grind, leveling up 24/7, ya dig? It's not about that basic, predictable stuff - it's all improv, all day. We can't even wrap our smooth brains around how lit this cosmic glow-up really is. Gotta stop overthinking and just vibe with it, fr fr. It's giving main character energy, but for the whole universe. Sheeesh!鈥嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€嬧€�

philosophy

爻丕賲乇丨賷丿乇丕賱賲噩丕賱賷

23 reviews1 follower

June 28, 2021

賱丕賷爻賱賰賴賳乇賷亘賷乇睾爻賵賳賲爻賱賰賸丕賲賳鬲馗賲賸丕賮賷亘爻胤兀賮賰丕乇賴貙亘賱賿賷購賱賯賷毓賳丿賰賱賽賾賲乇丨賱丞賮賰乇丞噩丿賷丿丞賱賴丕丕鬲氐丕賱賹亘賲賮賴賵賲賺賳賵賯卮賲賳賯亘賱貙賮賷毓賷丿丕賱賯丕乇卅廿賱賶丕賱賵乇丕亍賰賷賷鬲賲賰賳賲賳囟賲賽賾丕賱賯胤毓廿賱賶亘毓囟賴丕亘毓囟賸丕賵賷禺胤賵廿賱賶丕賱兀賲丕賲賮賷賮賴賲丕賱賳馗乇賷丞. 賵賴匕丕賮賷丨賯賷賯鬲賴兀賲乇賹賲乇亘賰貙賵賱毓賱賻賾爻亘亘賴賴賵賵賱毓亘賷乇睾爻賵賳亘賮賰乇丞 "丕賱鬲胤賵乇" 賮賷丨丿匕丕鬲賴丕貙賵賴賷賮賰乇丞鬲賯賵賲毓賱賶丕賱賮氐賱亘賷賳卮賰賱賷賳賵噩賵丿賷賷賳賯丕卅賲賷賳賱丕孬丕賱孬賱賴賲丕貙賴賲丕 "丕賱噩賲丕丿丕鬲賵丕賱兀丨賷丕亍".
賵賲亘丿兀丕賱丨賷丕丞丕賱匕賷禺乇噩鬲賲賳賴丕賱賰丕卅賳丕鬲丕賱丨賷丞噩賲賷毓賴丕匕賵 "兀氐賱賳賮爻賷" 毓亘賻賾乇賻毓賳 "賲賷賱" 乇丕爻禺賮賷賴賱鬲賰丕孬乇丕賱丨賷丕丞貙賮鬲噩爻丿賴匕丕丕賱賲賷賱毓亘乇 "賵孬亘丞" 丕鬲禺匕鬲賲爻丕乇丕鬲賲鬲毓丿丿丞貙賮鬲賲丕賷夭毓丕賱賲丕賱丨賷賵丕賳毓賳毓丕賱賲丕賱賳亘丕鬲賵鬲毓丿丿鬲丕賱賮乇賵毓. 賵賰丕賳 "丕賱卮毓賵乇" 賴賵丕賱賲丨乇賰丕賱賲賱丕夭賲賱賱賵孬亘丞賮賷賰賱賲乇丨賱丞賲賳賲乇丕丨賱賴丕貙賮胤賵乇賸丕賷賯賵賶廿匕丕丕賳賮鬲丨鬲丕賱丌賮丕賯賵賯賵賷鬲丕賱賲丿丕乇賰貙賵胤賵乇丕賷禺賮鬲廿匕丕囟毓賮鬲鬲賱賰丕賱賲丿丕乇賰貙賮賴賵亘丕毓孬毓賱賶丕賱毓賲賱貙賲丨賮夭賱賱丨乇賰丞貙賷兀禺匕亘賷丿賴丕廿賱賶丕賱兀賲丕賲賮賷 "丿賷賲賵賲丞" 賱丕鬲賳賯胤毓. 賵丕賱賱丕賮鬲賮賷賴兀賳賴賱丕賷爻賷乇廿賱賶睾丕賷丞賲丨丿丿丞貙賮賱丕賴賵賷鬲禺匕 "氐賵乇丞賲賷賰丕賳賷賰賷丞"貙賵賱丕賴賵鬲丨賰賲賴 "睾丕卅賷丞" 賵丕囟丨丞丕賱賲毓丕賱賲貙廿賳賴亘賷賳亘賷賳貙鬲賵賯賹賵毓卮賯賹賵乇睾亘丞賹賮賷馗賴賵乇兀卮賰丕賱廿囟丕賮賷丞賲賳丕賱丨賷丕丞貙賮丨爻亘.
廿賳賰鬲丕亘 "丕賱鬲胤賵乇丕賱禺丕賱賯" 賷卮亘賴鬲賱賰丕賱賵孬亘丞貙賮賴賵匕賵賲爻丕乇丕鬲毓丿賷丿丞貙賮賷賴丕賲丕賷賱鬲卅賲貙賵賮賷賴丕賲丕賷卮賷乇亘毓囟賴廿賱賶亘毓囟賴貙賵賮賷賴賲丕賴賵卮丿賷丿丕賱丕賳賮氐丕賱. 睾賷乇兀賳賱賴賲賮丕鬲賷丨鬲爻丕毓丿毓賱賶丕賱鬲毓丕賲賱賲毓賴貙賲賳賴丕丕賱賲賮丕賴賷賲丕賱賲卮丕乇廿賱賷賴丕賮賷丕賱賮賯乇丞丕賱爻丕亘賯丞貙丕賱鬲賷賰購鬲亘鬲亘禺胤睾丕賲賯廿卮丕乇丞廿賱賶兀賴賲賷鬲賴丕賮賷丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙賷購囟丕賮廿賱賷賴丕賮賰乇丞賲丨賵乇賷丞鬲鬲丨丿孬毓賳 "丕賱丨賯賷賯丞丕賱賵丕賯毓賷丞" 丕賱鬲賷賴賷賲丨賱兀孬乇丕賱丿賷賲賵賲丞賮賷丨丕賱賷丕賱兀丨賷丕亍賵丕賱噩賲丕丿丕鬲

Luke

783 reviews5 followers

February 15, 2024

For the readers out there keen to fully understand Bergson, a philosopher who is on the level of Aristotle, Plato, Hegel, Nietzsche, or Spinoza, one must be patient. This work is not always very accessible. This is one you might want to read after his other major works. Creative evolution is the paragon of the Bergsonian paradigm. A paradigm that has been followed by the more important philosophers of the past two centuries. Deleuze, Baudrillard, and Derrida. I will reread this book two more times along with books like Deleuze's Difference and Repetition, Baudrillard's Fatal Strategies, or Derrida's Margins of Philosophy.

It is this books political inaccessibility that tells it's story. This book comes out at a time when Bergson is essentially carrying on the mind bending work of both Nietzsche and Darwin, before either man had been fully discovered and appreciated. Unfortunately, Bergson is fighting against the optics of secularism and the paradigms of behaviorism, Galilean reductionism, and Platonism. Don鈥檛 read this book unless you have a background in all the above folks, and even then reread what he is saying. When Foucault is historically dethroned by Deleuze, it will be a short space of time before Bergson again redefines the modern.

2024 2025-reread eastern-postmodern-psychology

Czarny Pies

2,740 reviews1 follower

January 5, 2015

I had been meaning to read something by Bergson for some time primarily because he was the cousin of Marcel Proust. L'evolutin creatrice proved to proving to be an unexpected delight. It contains the ideas presented by Teilhard de Chardin in le Phenomene humaine in an embryonic form. Bergson argues that evolution is not the result of accidents but due to the "elan vital" of living things. Essentially Bergson argues that species evolve because they choose to do so. Teilhard de Chardin modifies Bergson to state that matter organizes itself towards life and that life organizes itself towards Christ. Bergson does not posit the existence of God which is the fundamental difference between this work and that of Teilhard de Chardin.

I found "l'evolution creatrice" to be a very rewarding read. It's fundamental value however in my view is that it created the base for Chardin to write his '"phenomene humaine". This book is clearly for a limited audience only.

nobel-prize-winners philosophy

Mariasole

85 reviews8 followers

January 22, 2022

Fantastico! Uno dei pi霉 straordinari filosofi dello scorso secolo prende in mano il dibattito sull'evoluzione e critica le posizione deterministiche e finaliste di Darwin e Lamarck affermando che la vita ha avuto inizio e si 猫 sviluppata attraverso uno slancio vitale comune a tutte le specie sulla terra, che ha preso migliaia di direzioni differenti in base alla lotta tra vita (flusso creativo) e materia (leggi fisiche) che sono l'una opposta all'altra. Nel libro viengono trattate molte tematiche come l adistinzione tra istinto ed intelligenza e quale ruolo gioca la coscienza in entrambe le realt脿. La realt脿 come un flusso di coscienza che 猫 maggiore negli organismi con il sistema nervoso pi霉 sviluppato, ma non 猫 il cervello. Bergson critica anche la presa di visione dei creazionisti, affermando che in verit脿 le cose che noi vediamo non esistono, ma ci sono unicamente azioni e movimento.

saggi-filosofia

Dorian Neerdael

102 reviews5 followers

July 30, 2011

Un des livres principaux de Bergson o霉 celui-ci tente de d茅ployer son ontologie du devenir, avec l'importance qu'il accorde habituellement 脿 la dur茅e. La philosophie ne peut pas faire l'impasse sur les avanc茅es scientifiques et doit admettre les cons茅quences de l'茅volutionnisme darwinien. La philosophie doit abandonner la m茅taphysique traditionnelle d'un absolu ferm茅 sur lui-m锚me, au profit d'un monde dont la valeur principale est la cr茅ation, c'est-脿-dire la libert茅, la croissance et le changement. De ce point de vue, Bergson pourrait 锚tre lu avec les philosophes de la diff茅rence.

C'est un tr猫s bon livre, malgr茅 sa complexit茅 au premier abord. Bergson 茅crit bien, son style est doux mais il aurait mieux fait de diviser ses quelques 369 pages en plus de quatre chapitres, parce que c'est un peu peu alors.

Displaying 1 - 30 of 92 reviews

More reviews and ratings

Join the discussion

quotes

discussions

question

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.

欧宝娱乐

螖畏渭喂慰蠀蟻纬喂魏萎蔚尉苇位喂尉畏