Fighting for Time Graham Farmelo Enjoys an Account of Einstein’S Clash with Philosopher Henri Bergson

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Fighting for Time Graham Farmelo Enjoys an Account of Einstein’S Clash with Philosopher Henri Bergson COMMENT BOOKS & ARTS Henri Bergson (left) thought Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity was a flawed philosophy. PHYSICS Fighting for time Graham Farmelo enjoys an account of Einstein’s clash with philosopher Henri Bergson. ertrand Russell is reputed to have The Physicist and the Philosopher: Einstein, from his theories. Einstein’s reply was terse to said that “science is organized com- Bergson, and the Debate That Changed Our the point of rudeness. He said that there were mon sense; philosophy is organized Understanding of Time only two ways of understanding time — psy- JIMENA CANALES Bpiffle”. Although probably being playful, he chological and physical — and the philoso- Princeton Univ. Press: 2015. was articulating the view of many physi- pher’s time did not exist. The rebuttal lasted cists. Theoretical physicist Steven Weinberg in Paris on 6 April 1922. Bergson was 62 about a minute. That night, Einstein wrote to declared the “unreasonable ineffectiveness” and had long been internationally famous. his wife: “All went brilliantly well.” He believed of philosophy in his field; he was outdone by Einstein, two decades his junior, had recently that Bergson was confused and ignorant HÖHLIG/ULLSTEIN BILD VIA GETTY HÖHLIG/ULLSTEIN Stephen Hawking, who in 2011 pronounced become an even more prominent celebrity, about relativity. Bergson was convinced that philosophy “dead”. Yet only a century ago, the after astronomers gave widely publicized his opponent had not understood him. R: MARTIN BILD VIA GETTY; L: ULLSTEIN two disciplines coexisted happily. empirical support to his general theory of Bergson plainly did not comprehend basic One theoretician who read widely in relativity. aspects of relativity, so it is hardly surpris- philosophy was Albert Einstein. Physicist Their exchange was intellectually sterile. ing that this spat did nothing to make lead- Nándor Balázs, who worked with him in the We do not know exactly what Bergson said, ing theoret­icians reassess the theory. But he early 1950s, told me that Einstein would often but he probably expressed the views set out did some damage. In 1922, when Einstein spend hours reading philosophy, and admired in his contentious Duration and Simultane- received a Nobel Prize for his “services to the work of seventeenth-century Dutch phi- ity later that year. In it, he chastised relativity theoretical physics”, the citation mentioned losopher Baruch Spinoza. However, he had theory for going beyond physics to become a his work on the photoelectric effect, not rela- little time for those who expatiated on physics “flawed philosophy” that should be strongly tivity. Pressed to explain, Nobel Committee that they did not understand. This seems to resisted. He felt that human consciousness president Svante Arrhenius said: “It will be no have been at the root of tensions between Ein- plays a crucial part in our knowledge of the secret that the famous philosopher Bergson in stein and French philosopher Henri Bergson. Universe, so a complete account of time must Paris challenged the theory.” Four years later, Their quarrel about the nature of time is the reflect its subjective aspects (our perception Bergson was awarded a Nobel of his own, for subject of The Physicist and the Philosopher, a of durations of time depend, of course, on the literature. hefty, stimulating study by science historian circumstances in which we experience them). Canales aims to clarify the essence of Jimena Canales. Bergson spent half an hour putting his case; the quarrel without taking sides. Reading Canales begins with an account of their it was certain to raise the hackles of Einstein, between the lines, she seems to sympathize meeting, at the French Philosophical Society who strove to remove subjective elements with maverick twentieth-century physicist 286 | NATURE | VOL 521 | 21 MAY 2015 © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved BOOKS & ARTS COMMENT and critic of relativity theory Herbert Dingle, who lamented that in general the scientist “understands what he is doing about as well Books in brief as a centipede understands how he walks”. Einstein does not seem to have spent Moore’s Law: The Life of Gordon Moore, Silicon Valley’s much time worrying about Bergson’s views, Quiet Revolutionary although he commented on the meeting occa- Arnold Thackray, David C. Brock and Rachel Jones BaSIC (2015) sionally to friends, not giving any ground. In 1957, experimental chemist Gordon Moore and his colleagues Bergson, by contrast, criticized Einstein’s formed a start-up manufacturing silicon transistors in Mountain relativistic concept of time and promoted his View, California. Silicon Valley was born, and the prediction known own case indefatigably. He wrote to Einstein’s as Moore’s Law began to play out: the number of transistors in hero, physicist Hendrik Lorentz, who despite integrated circuits started to double every two years. Arnold Thackray, differences with Einstein offered little solace. David Brock and Rachel Jones transform Moore from a man “doing Bergson also conversed with Albert Michel- something inscrutable in the margins” to a comprehensible, fiercely son — a top-drawer experimentalist but not driven technophile who shaped history from the inside out. a deep thinker about relativity — and used his insights to inform his case against Einstein. Canales does sterling work investigating these Move UP: Why Some Cultures Advance While Others Don’t engagements, and even the largely incoher- Clotaire Rapaille and Andrés Roemer ALLEN LaNE (2015) ent contributions of the Catholic Church. With gross domestic product looking ever thinner as an index Regardless of the views of his few critics, Ein- of success, marketing specialist Clotaire Rapaille and diplomat stein’s concept of time, supported by experi- Andrés Roemer proffer a new analytic tool for gauging progress, ment, became part of the bedrock of physics. informed by behavioural economics, neuroscience and evolutionary In my view, Canales exaggerates Bergson’s psychology. Their R2 Mobility Index rests on a country’s cultural influence on our understanding of time, and capacity to enable upward mobility, and its ability to sensibly underestimates Einstein’s substantial contri- support the basic biological imperatives of security, success, survival bution to philosophy. Throughout his career, and sex. Scandinavian nations top several indices here, but Rapaille he was thoughtful about the philosophy of and Roemer’s provocative synthesis throws up surprises too. physics. With colleague Max Planck, he even helped to create a chair in the philosophy of science at the University of Berlin in the mid- Coastlines: The Story of Our Shore 1920s. Around that time, the value of philoso- Patrick Barkham GRaNTa (2015) phy was discounted by several young pioneers “The British Isles,” writes Patrick Barkham, “are more edge than of quantum mechanics, notably Paul Dirac. middle.” Here he pays homage to the chalk cliffs and tidal flats Canales oddly portrays the development of the 17,800-kilometre coastline to mark 50 years of National of quantum physics as an embarrassment Trust protection of more than half of it. Filtered through his hyper- for Einstein, when he was not only one of its observant sensibility, it all becomes fabulously strange: Undercliff pioneers but also perhaps its most astute and near Lyme Regis, for instance, is an active landslide festooned with respected critic. She sees the theory as a vin- botanical oddities and criss-crossed by shrews. Barkham’s tour of the dication of Bergson, whom she credits with wind-scoured spots on this ragged borderland reminds why it has anticipating Werner Heisenberg’s uncer- mesmerized scientists, artists and all those hungering for horizons. tainty principle by some 20 years. It seems to me fanciful to link Bergson’s long advocacy of indeterminism with Heisenberg’s precise Pax Technica: How the Internet of Things May Set Us Free or Lock concept of the indeterminability of specific Us Up pairs of variables in quantum mechanics. Nor Philip N. Howard YaLE UNIVERSITy PRESS (2015) does Canales underline that physicists pro- The Internet of Things could encompass 30 billion connected duced a fully relativistic theory of quantum smart devices — from cars to spectacles — within just five years. mechanics, incorporating Einsteinian time. In analysing this pervasive phenomenon, sociologist Philip Howard She does a fine job, however, of highlighting emphasizes its potential as the titular “pax technica”, binding the lack of constructive engagement between industry and government in “mutual defense pacts, design physicists and philosophers, beyond a few collaborations, standards setting and data mining”. Howard duly centres that specialize in the philosophy of notes possible risks, such as intensified mass surveillance, but physics. I sense that many would like to see argues that new devices could become “liberation technologies”. some sort of rapprochement, and I warmly agree. On the evidence presented in this stimulating book, however, such a revolution The Soul of an Octopus: A Surprising Exploration into the Wonder is likely only after physicists shed some of the of Consciousness condescension that they sometimes show to Sy Montgomery ATRIa (2015) other disciplines, and after philosophers cut “Twisting, gelatinous, her arms boil up from the water, reaching for from their discourse every last trace of piffle. ■ mine.” So begins naturalist Sy Montgomery’s close encounter with a giant Pacific octopus (Enteroctopus dofleini) in this delightful study of Graham Farmelo is a by-fellow at Churchill cephalopods in the wild, aquaria and labs. Montgomery celebrates the College of the University of Cambridge, UK, solitary invertebrates in all their behavioural and physiological glory — and author of Churchill’s Bomb. as playful escapologists, problem-solvers and masters of camouflage e-mail: [email protected] that can taste and might even see with their skin. Barbara Kiser 21 MAY 2015 | VOL 521 | NATURE | 287 © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.
Recommended publications
  • New Yorkers Had Been Anticipating His Visit for Months. at Columbia
    INTRODUCTION ew Yorkers had been anticipating his visit for months. At Columbia University, where French intellectual Henri Bergson (1859–1941) Nwas to give twelve lectures in February 1913, expectations were es- pecially high. When first approached by officials at Columbia, he had asked for a small seminar room where he could directly interact with students and faculty—something that fit both his personality and his speaking style. But Columbia sensed a potential spectacle. They instead put him in the three- hundred-plus-seat lecture theater in Havemeyer Hall. That much attention, Bergson insisted, would make him too nervous to speak in English without notes. Columbia persisted. So, because rhetorical presentation was as impor- tant to him as the words themselves, Bergson delivered his first American lec- ture entirely in French.1 Among the standing-room-only throng of professors and editors were New York journalists and “well-dressed” and “overdressed” women, all fumbling to make sense of Bergson’s “Spiritualité et Liberté” that slushy evening. Between their otherwise dry lines of copy, the reporters’ in- credulity was nearly audible as they recorded how hundreds of New Yorkers strained to hear this “frail, thin, small sized man with sunken cheeks” practi- cally whisper an entire lecture on metaphysics in French.2 That was only a prelude. Bergson’s “Free Will versus Determinism” lec- ture on Tuesday, February 4th—once again delivered in his barely audible French—caused the academic equivalent of a riot. Two thousand people attempted to cram themselves into Havemeyer. Hundreds of hopeful New Yorkers were denied access; long queues of the disappointed snaked around the building and lingered in the slush.
    [Show full text]
  • INTUITION .THE PHILOSOPHY of HENRI BERGSON By
    THE RHYTHM OF PHILOSOPHY: INTUITION ·ANI? PHILOSO~IDC METHOD IN .THE PHILOSOPHY OF HENRI BERGSON By CAROLE TABOR FlSHER Bachelor Of Arts Taylor University Upland, Indiana .. 1983 Submitted ~o the Faculty of the Graduate College of the · Oklahoma State University in partial fulfi11ment of the requirements for . the Degree of . Master of Arts May, 1990 Oklahoma State. Univ. Library THE RHY1HM OF PlllLOSOPHY: INTUITION ' AND PfnLoSOPlllC METHOD IN .THE PHILOSOPHY OF HENRI BERGSON Thesis Approved: vt4;;. e ·~lu .. ·~ests AdVIsor /l4.t--OZ. ·~ ,£__ '', 13~6350' ii · ,. PREFACE The writing of this thesis has bee~ a tiring, enjoyable, :Qustrating and challenging experience. M.,Bergson has introduced me to ·a whole new way of doing . philosophy which has put vitality into the process. I have caught a Bergson bug. His vision of a collaboration of philosophers using his intuitional m~thod to correct, each others' work and patiently compile a body of philosophic know: ledge is inspiring. I hope I have done him justice in my description of that vision. If I have succeeded and that vision catches your imagination I hope you Will make the effort to apply it. Please let me know of your effort, your successes and your failures. With the current challenges to rationalist epistemology, I believe the time has come to give Bergson's method a try. My discovery of Bergson is. the culmination of a development of my thought, one that started long before I began my work at Oklahoma State. However, there are some people there who deserv~. special thanks for awakening me from my ' "''' analytic slumber.
    [Show full text]
  • NYU Paris PHIL-UA 9026 C01, History of French Philosophy
    NYU Paris PHIL-UA 9026 C01, History of French philosophy Instructor Information ● Philippe Lusson ● office hours TBD ● [email protected] Course Information ● PHIL-UA 9026 C01 ● History of French Philosophy ● An overview of important developments in French philosophy from the 16th century to the 1960s. We will pay close attention this semester to the relationship between the self and others. We will look at the debates that followed the rediscovery of Ancient philosophy and the Copernican revolution with Descartes’ rationalist and individualistic philosophy, Condillac’s empiricist critique, whose role for language brings the self into a web of social relations, and the growing recognition of the problem of society with Rousseau. We will then look at Henri Bergson’s reaction to the rise of the empirical sciences in the 19th century and especially at his distinction between the deep self and the social self. We will deepen our appreciation of the issues Bergson highlights with readings from René Girard and Jean Baudrillard, and we will look for possible solutions in Alexandre Kojève’s reading of Hegel and in Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir’s distinctive development of existentialism. ● No prerequisites ● Lecture Tuesday 5 to 6:30pm, recitation sections Thursday 3-4:30pm and 5-6:30pm ● NYU Paris, room TBD Course Overview and Goals Upon Completion of this Course, students will be able to: ● get a sense of the historical evolution of philosophy since the 16th-century, ● see how French philosophers developed some of the key ideas and movements in that history ● identity and debate important issues philosophers still discuss today ● learn how to assess the strength and weaknesses of arguments, ● engage in constructive philosophical discussion, give reasons, and raise objections, Page 1 ● perfect their skills in argumentative writing.
    [Show full text]
  • Bergsoniana, 1
    Bergsoniana 1 | 2021 Reassessing Bergson The Duration of History in Bergson Caterina Zanfi Electronic version URL: https://journals.openedition.org/bergsoniana/435 DOI: 10.4000/bergsoniana.435 ISSN: 2800-874X Publisher Société des amis de Bergson Electronic reference Caterina Zanfi, “The Duration of History in Bergson ”, Bergsoniana [Online], 1 | 2021, Online since 01 July 2021, connection on 14 September 2021. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/bergsoniana/435 ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/bergsoniana.435 Les contenus de la revue sont mis à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. THE DURATION OF HISTORY IN BERGSON Caterina ZANFI I. Is There a Philosophy of History in Bergson? Bergson has often been criticised for not thinking history. Although he developed one of the most relevant philosophies of time of the last century, his rare statements on history are said to betray an impoverished sense of properly historical issues. Moreover, this criticism is made concerning both his consideration of history as the becoming of human reality and his consideration of historical knowledge and narrative — of both history and historiography. It was first articulated in the 1930s by Marxist intellectuals like Paul Nizan (who was to perish in the fight against Nazism in 1940). In 1932, Nizan published a polemic entitled The Watchdogs against the so called “Philosophers of the Established Order.” There he includes Bergson among the philosophers who are “against history” (Nizan 1965, 29),1 considering him incapable of understanding the time and space in which philosophical ideas arise and therefore lacking in sensitivity for the material and embodied aspects of the historical becoming of philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Time: a Slightly Opinionated Introduction
    Philosophy of time: A slightly opinionated introduction Florian Fischer There are several intertwined debates in the area of contemporary philos- ophy of time. One field of inquiry is the nature of time itself. Presentists think that only the present moment exists whereas eternalists believe that all of (space-)time exists on a par. The second main field of inquiry is the question of how objects persist through time. The endurantist claims that objects are three-dimensional wholes, which persist by being wholly1 present, whereas the perdurantist thinks that objects are four- dimensional and that their temporal parts are the bearers of properties. The third debate in the field of contemporary philosophy of time is about tense- versus tenseless theory. Tensers are at odds with detensers about the status of the linguistic reference to the present moment. These are only very crude characterizations and it is even disputed by some ad- vocates of the corresponding positions that they are accurate. However this very sketchy picture already reveals a fundamental difference: The eternalism/presentism and endurance/perdurance discussions belong to the field of metaphysics, whereas tense is in the first instance a linguistic phenomenon. Among the many fields of philosophy, there are two that are more intimately interconnected than most but whose practi- tioners have too long pursued relatively independent paths. On the one hand, there are philosophers of language, who have devoted much attention to indexicals (`now', etc.), tem- poral operators (`it has been the case that', etc.), and tensed sentences. On the other hand, there are the philosophers of tensed and tenseless time (also called A-time or B-time, dynamic time or static time, etc.).
    [Show full text]
  • The Organism – Reality Or Fiction?
    The organism – reality or fiction? organism CHARLES T WOLFE SCOUTS THE ANSWERS forum/ hat is an “organism”? A state We murder to dissect, or as the famous physicist of matter, or a particular type Niels Bohr warned, we may kill the organism of living being chosen as an with our too-detailed measurements. experimental object, like the Historically, the word “organism” emerged in Wfruit fly or the roundworm c. elegans, which the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centu- 96 are “model organisms”? Organisms are real, in ries, in particular, in the debate between the a trivial sense, since flies and Tasmanian tigers philosopher and polymath Gottfried Wilhelm and Portuguese men-o-war are (or were, in the Leibniz and the chemist and physician Georg- case of the Tasmanian tiger) as real as tables and Ernest Stahl, the author of a 1708 essay On the chairs and planets. But at the same time, they difference between mechanism and organism. are meaningful constructs, as when we describe Both Leibniz and Stahl agree that organisms Hegel or Whitehead as philosophers of organism are not the same as mere mechanisms, but in the sense that they insist on the irreducible they differ on how to account for this differ- properties of wholes – sometimes, living wholes ence. For Leibniz, it is more of a difference in in particular. In addition, the idea of organism complexity (for him, organisms are machines is sometimes appealed to in a polemical way, as which are machines down to their smallest parts), when biologists or philosophers angrily oppose a whereas for Stahl, the organism is a type of whole more “holistic” sense of organism to a seemingly governed by the soul (at all levels of our bodily cold-hearted, analytic and dissective attitude functioning, from the way I blink if an object associated with “mechanism” and “reductionism”.
    [Show full text]
  • 'Continental' Philosophy
    Russell’s critique of Bergson and the divide between ‘Analytic’ and ‘Continental’ philosophy Final draft version of article published in the Balkan Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 123- 134, 2011. Andreas Vrahimis Birkbeck, University of London 2010 Russell’s critique of Bergson and the divide between ‘Analytic’ and ‘Continental’ philosophy Abstract: In 1911, Bergson visited Britain for a number of lectures which led to his increasing popularity. Russell personally encountered Bergson during his lecture at University College London on 28 October, and on 30 October Bergson attended one of Russell’s lectures. Russell went on to write a number of critical articles on Bergson, contributing to the hundreds of publications on Bergson which ensued following these lectures. Russell’s critical writings have been seen as part of a history of controversies between so-called ‘Continental’ and ‘Analytic’ philosophers in the twentieth century. Yet Russell’s engagement with Bergson’s thought comes as a response to a particular British form of Bergsonism and is involved with the wider phenomenon of the British import of Bergsonism (by figures connected in different ways to Russell, such as Hulme, Wildon Carr or Eliot). Though this may challenge the view of Russell and Bergson as enacting an early version of the ‘Analytic’-‘Continental’ divide, there are however some particular characterisations of Bergson by Russell which contribute to the subsequent formation of the ‘rotten scene’ (Glendinning 2006: 69) of the divide in the second half of the twentieth century. Keywords: Russell; Bergson; Analytic; Continental; divide 1. Introduction The twentieth century has seen the rise of an image of Western academic philosophy as divided between two predominant camps, one ‘Continental’ and the other ‘Analytic’.
    [Show full text]
  • Durée and Temporality : a Defense of Bergson's
    DURÉE AND TEMPORALITY: A DEFENSE OF BERGSON’S CONCEPTION OF TIME DURACIÓN Y TEMPORALIDAD: UNA DEFENSA DE LA CONCEPCIÓN DEL TIEMPO DE BERGSON JORGE ALEJANDRO FLÓREZ RESTREPO* Universidad de Caldas, Colombia. [email protected] RECIBIDO EL 18 DE JULIO DE 2015, APROBADO EL 30 DE OCTUBRE DE 2015 RESUMEN ABSTRACT Este artículo es una defensa del concepto This paper is a defense of Bergson’s de tiempo en Bergson, en contra de las conception of time against Heidegger’s acusaciones de Heidegger en Ser y tiempo. accusation on Being and Time. There, Allí, Heidegger acusó el concepto de tiempo Heidegger accused Bergson’s conception bergsoniano de incurrir en el mismo error of committing the same mistake of de la tradición filosófica al tomar el tiempo the traditional conception of time as a como una sucesión espacial de “ahoras”. spatialized succession of “nows.” This is Esta es una acusación injusta porque los an unfair accusation, for Bergson’s main conceptos de tiempo en Bergson, duración concepts of Duration and Élan Vital are y Élan vital, son precisamente opuestos precisely opposite to that. In fact, Bergson’s a la concepción tradicional. De hecho, concept of time coincides with Heidegger’s el concepto de tiempo según Bergson conception of Temporality which is coincide con la concepción heideggeriana essential in his existential analytical and de temporalidad, la cual es esencial fundamental ontology. para su analítica existencial y ontología fundamental. PALABRAS CLAVE KEY WORDS Bergson, Heidegger, tiempo, duración, Bergson, Heidegger, time, duration, Élan Élan Vital, temporalidad. vital, temporality. * orcid.org/0000-0003-2346-0926 Discusiones Filosóficas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bergsonian Moment: Science and Spirit in France, 1874-1907
    THE BERGSONIAN MOMENT: SCIENCE AND SPIRIT IN FRANCE, 1874-1907 by Larry Sommer McGrath A dissertation submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland June, 2014 © 2014 Larry Sommer McGrath All Rights Reserved Intended to be blank ii Abstract My dissertation is an intellectual and cultural history of a distinct movement in modern Europe that I call “scientific spiritualism.” I argue that the philosopher Henri Bergson emerged from this movement as its most celebrated spokesman. From the 1874 publication of Émile Boutroux’s The Contingency of the Laws of Nature to Bergson’s 1907 Creative Evolution, a wave of heterodox thinkers, including Maurice Blondel, Alfred Fouillée, Jean-Marie Guyau, Pierre Janet, and Édouard Le Roy, gave shape to scientific spiritualism. These thinkers staged a rapprochement between two disparate formations: on the one hand, the rich heritage of French spiritualism, extending from the sixteenth- and seventeeth-century polymaths Michel de Montaigne and René Descartes to the nineteenth-century philosophes Maine de Biran and Victor Cousin; and on the other hand, transnational developments in the emergent natural and human sciences, especially in the nascent experimental psychology and evolutionary biology. I trace the influx of these developments into Paris, where scientific spiritualists collaboratively rejuvenated the philosophical and religious study of consciousness on the basis of the very sciences that threatened the authority of philosophy and religion. Using original materials gathered in French and Belgian archives, I argue that new reading communities formed around scientific journals, the explosion of research institutes, and the secularization of the French education system, brought about this significant, though heretofore neglected wave of thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Bergsoniana, 1
    Bergsoniana 1 | 2021 Reassessing Bergson What Bergson Should Have Said to Einstein Steven Savitt Electronic version URL: https://journals.openedition.org/bergsoniana/333 DOI: 10.4000/bergsoniana.333 ISSN: 2800-874X Publisher Société des amis de Bergson Electronic reference Steven Savitt, “What Bergson Should Have Said to Einstein”, Bergsoniana [Online], 1 | 2021, Online since 01 July 2021, connection on 14 September 2021. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/bergsoniana/ 333 ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/bergsoniana.333 Les contenus de la revue sont mis à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. WHAT BERGSON SHOULD HAVE SAID TO EINSTEIN1 Steven SAVITT Let me begin by repeating (changing only the name) a paragraph from a recent paper by David Chalmers: I should say that I am not a historian or a serious scholar of Bergson. These are merely some speculative remarks not well-grounded in scholarly attention to Bergson’s texts. But I think the speculative question is interesting. I’m going to sketch one speculative answer. I’m going to be interested to hear from people who know much more about Bergson than I do about whether this speculation has any remote plausibility. If the historical speculation has none, as may well be possible, I think there is still a very interesting philosophical project in the neighbourhood which is itself worthy of attention (Chalmers 2018). My speculative remarks concern the famous debate between Henri Bergson and Albert Einstein that took place in Paris on 6 April 1922. This encounter has recently received a book-length treatment (Canales 2015), but little of the substance of the debate was actually reported in it.
    [Show full text]
  • Bertrand Russell's Criticism of Bergson's Views About
    FILOZOFIA ___________________________________________________________________________ Roč. 68, 2013, č. 10 BERTRAND RUSSELL’S CRITICISM OF BERGSON’S VIEWS ABOUT CONTINUITY AND DISCRETENESS VESSELIN PETROV, Institute for the Study of Societies and Knowledge, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria PETROV, V.: Bertrand Russell’s Criticism of Bergson’s Views about Continuity and Discreteness FILOZOFIA 68, 2013, No 10, p. 890-904 This paper is devoted to Bertrand Russell’s criticism of Henri Bergson’s philosophy. It traces out the origins of that criticism and analyzes its essence, reasons and devel- opment in Russell’s works. Because of the importance of the concepts of space and time for Bergson’s philosophy and, in turn, the importance of continuity and dis- creteness for the understanding of space and time, the central part of the analysis concerns the views of both philosophers on continuity and discreteness, including Zeno’s paradoxes. The main thesis of the paper is that Russell’s criticism of Berg- son’s philosophy comes, to a great extent, from Russell’s misunderstanding of Berg- son. Keywords: Bertrand Russell’ philosophy – Bergson’s philosophy – Continuity – Dis- creteness – Zeno’s paradoxes 1. Introduction. In 1911 Henri Bergson visited Great Britain to deliver several lec- th tures on his philosophy. His first meeting with Bertrand Russell happened on October 28 at one of these lectures. Two days after this initial meeting Bergson attended Russell’s lecture. However these meetings between them did not stimulate a kind of cooperation. Just the opposite, shortly after their meeting Russell initiated a severe criticism of Berg- son’s philosophy. In fact Russell’s criticism of Bergson is a reaction against the penetra- tion of Bergsonism into Great Britain that influenced British thinkers such as Wildon Carr, Thomas Eliot and Alfred North Whitehead.
    [Show full text]
  • Absurd Time: Understanding Camus' Quantitative Ethics Through
    6 Absurd Time Absurd Time: Understanding Camus’ Quantitative Ethics Through Bergsonian Duration Thomas Ruan “Only through time time is conquered” T.S. Eliot In The Myth of Sisyphus, Albert Camus tries to work through what he calls the “one truly serious philosophical problem”: sui- cide (3). He begins by noting that the human experience is funda- mentally marked by absurdity, which he defines as the opposi- tion between the irrational nature of the world and man's innate desire to understand it. The absurd is not merely the passive in- difference and irrationality of the world around us; it arises more specifically from our continual failure to make any kind of ade- quate sense of it. This is why Camus points out that “'It's absurd' means 'It's impossible' but also 'It's contradictory'” (29). The sim- plest way to deal with absurdity, then, is to remove one term from the equation by committing suicide. Camus resists this so- lution, because suicide fails to pay heed to the power that the ab- surd can give to our lives. By living in absurdity, and accepting its fundamental contradiction, we revolt against the temptation to shy away from existence– “that revolt gives life its value” (55). “Living is keeping the absurd alive,” and it is this affirmation of the absurdity of our condition that allows us to live purposive and meaningful lives. However Camus then makes a conclusion that seems quite troubling. He writes that, “belief in the meaning of life always implies a scale of values, a choice, our preferences.
    [Show full text]