Captiveness and Openness as Ontological Intuitions in Works of H. Bergson

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Maksim F. Litvinov
{"title":"Captiveness and Openness as Ontological Intuitions in Works of H. Bergson","authors":"Maksim F. Litvinov","doi":"10.22363/2313-2302-2023-27-2-332-344","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The research focuses on the problem of freedom from that point of view which puts captiveness by being and openness to being in the middle of non-dialectical examination. This perspective clarifies not only the major course of Bergson’s thought, but also the subsequent incorrect shift to the pole of openness in the hermeneutical interpretation of facticity, implemented by Heidegger. The work is conventionally divided into two parts. The first one inquires about specifics of the method used by Bergson. It is emphasized the proximity in between Bergson's orientation to the common sense and phenomenological research, despite all differences in these approaches. Also it’s gives a general analysis of Bergson’s concepts used in “Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness” and in “Matter and Memory” in order to adequately questioning about the freedom of a person, acting on the basis of specific practical conditions of his existence. Bergson draws the roads of freedom through the adaptability of the intelligible to the prose of life, establishing the plane of immanence with its unbreakable boundaries. The second part analyzes aesthetic consequences of Bergson’s theory of perception and memory, thus opening access to descending pathways in sensory data processing. The theory of duration and the emphasis it places on retrospection in clarifying what accompanies the act of perception, argues for the connection of creativity with the process of actualization of the virtual. With reference to Deleuze, it is criticized the irrational attempt to assert the beginning of creativity both in nothingness and in the realization of the possible by its limiting. Thus, the appeal to Bergson’s ontological intuitions allows to refuse both the aesthetics of the origin and the logic of the readiness-to-hand-being as primarily encountered in the world. In conclusion, it is considered Bergson's polemic with Einstein, in the resolution of which the logic of differentiation seems preferable to the logic of dialectical sublation.","PeriodicalId":32651,"journal":{"name":"RUDN Journal of Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUDN Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2302-2023-27-2-332-344","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The research focuses on the problem of freedom from that point of view which puts captiveness by being and openness to being in the middle of non-dialectical examination. This perspective clarifies not only the major course of Bergson’s thought, but also the subsequent incorrect shift to the pole of openness in the hermeneutical interpretation of facticity, implemented by Heidegger. The work is conventionally divided into two parts. The first one inquires about specifics of the method used by Bergson. It is emphasized the proximity in between Bergson's orientation to the common sense and phenomenological research, despite all differences in these approaches. Also it’s gives a general analysis of Bergson’s concepts used in “Time and Free Will: An Essay on the Immediate Data of Consciousness” and in “Matter and Memory” in order to adequately questioning about the freedom of a person, acting on the basis of specific practical conditions of his existence. Bergson draws the roads of freedom through the adaptability of the intelligible to the prose of life, establishing the plane of immanence with its unbreakable boundaries. The second part analyzes aesthetic consequences of Bergson’s theory of perception and memory, thus opening access to descending pathways in sensory data processing. The theory of duration and the emphasis it places on retrospection in clarifying what accompanies the act of perception, argues for the connection of creativity with the process of actualization of the virtual. With reference to Deleuze, it is criticized the irrational attempt to assert the beginning of creativity both in nothingness and in the realization of the possible by its limiting. Thus, the appeal to Bergson’s ontological intuitions allows to refuse both the aesthetics of the origin and the logic of the readiness-to-hand-being as primarily encountered in the world. In conclusion, it is considered Bergson's polemic with Einstein, in the resolution of which the logic of differentiation seems preferable to the logic of dialectical sublation.
柏格森作品中的囚禁性与开放性:本体直觉
研究的重点是自由问题,这一观点将存在的迷人性和存在的开放性置于非辩证的考察之中。这一视角不仅阐明了柏格森思想的主要历程,也阐明了海德格尔在对事实性的解释学解释中随后错误地向开放极点的转移。这项工作按惯例分为两部分。第一个问题是关于柏格森使用的方法的细节。它强调了柏格森对常识的定位与现象学研究之间的接近性,尽管这些方法存在所有差异。并对柏格森在《时间与自由意志:意识的直接数据随笔》和《物质与记忆》中所使用的概念进行了一般性分析,以充分质疑一个人在其存在的特定现实条件下的自由。柏格森通过可理解的事物对生活散文的适应性来描绘自由之路,建立了具有牢不可破边界的内在平面。第二部分分析了柏格森感知记忆理论的美学后果,从而为感官数据处理开辟了下降的途径。持续时间理论以及它在澄清感知行为伴随着什么时所强调的回顾性,主张创造性与虚拟实现过程的联系。关于德勒兹,它被批评为在虚无中断言创造力的开始,并通过其限制来实现可能的非理性尝试。因此,对柏格森本体论直觉的呼吁允许拒绝起源的美学和世界上主要遇到的现成存在的逻辑。总之,它被认为是柏格森与爱因斯坦的论战,在这场论战中,微分逻辑似乎比辩证扬弃逻辑更可取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
RUDN Journal of Philosophy
RUDN Journal of Philosophy Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信