chefgirlsatan's review against another edition
I didn’t understand metaphysics before this nor do I after.
janthonytucson's review against another edition
5.0
This is a great first jump into Bergson. I have read other works by Bergson and several books on him, so none of the information in this short ~60-page book is new, however the writing is rather lucid and engaging and I would highly recommend starting here if you are trying to get a feel for Bergson.
What really stood out to me in this piece is the similarities between Bruno Latour’s conception of the proliferation of ‘hybrids’ that modern science has created - which Latour explicates in “We Have Never Been Modern.’ Bergson's ‘An Introduction to Metaphysics’ focuses almost exclusively on how positive science relies upon concepts (which are abstractions) to analyze and artificially reconstruct the object of their study and through this process these abstractions grow indefinitely larger and take on a reality of their own (of course no longer reflecting reality, which is Bergson's point, and like Latour who argues the ever growing, and overwhelming multiplicity of hybrids).
The end of the book focuses on critiquing Kant’s insistence on universalization, and really this is the whole point. Bergson fundamentally believes every moment is unique and every situation we are faced with - in any frame - is indeterminate and we should acknowledge this enormous privilege and actively engage in this creative process. The more I read of Bergson the more I am reading this as an ethics - This is Heraclitus, and on the other side you have Parmenides. The former demands humility paired with a childlike wonder which necessarily drives the creative impulse latent in all, and the later conveniently comforts the anxieties of terrified and shiftless souls through its determinism.
A Bergsonian ethics demands more than a Kantian ethics; or another way of looking at this - modern positive science through its logics of universalizing particular, contingent, context dependent knowledge through symbols of abstraction, is an ethics of cowardice and Bergsonism through its demands of intentionally engaging with each particular context dependent reality is an ethics of courage.
What really stood out to me in this piece is the similarities between Bruno Latour’s conception of the proliferation of ‘hybrids’ that modern science has created - which Latour explicates in “We Have Never Been Modern.’ Bergson's ‘An Introduction to Metaphysics’ focuses almost exclusively on how positive science relies upon concepts (which are abstractions) to analyze and artificially reconstruct the object of their study and through this process these abstractions grow indefinitely larger and take on a reality of their own (of course no longer reflecting reality, which is Bergson's point, and like Latour who argues the ever growing, and overwhelming multiplicity of hybrids).
The end of the book focuses on critiquing Kant’s insistence on universalization, and really this is the whole point. Bergson fundamentally believes every moment is unique and every situation we are faced with - in any frame - is indeterminate and we should acknowledge this enormous privilege and actively engage in this creative process. The more I read of Bergson the more I am reading this as an ethics - This is Heraclitus, and on the other side you have Parmenides. The former demands humility paired with a childlike wonder which necessarily drives the creative impulse latent in all, and the later conveniently comforts the anxieties of terrified and shiftless souls through its determinism.
A Bergsonian ethics demands more than a Kantian ethics; or another way of looking at this - modern positive science through its logics of universalizing particular, contingent, context dependent knowledge through symbols of abstraction, is an ethics of cowardice and Bergsonism through its demands of intentionally engaging with each particular context dependent reality is an ethics of courage.
alexander0's review against another edition
5.0
This one left me with a lot of questions about how to integrate much of the philosophy of science I had been reading, and thinking about how science and technology studies as being empirically limited in predicting what we can design of things like AI, Virtual Reality, and social media platforms.
This is a really cool read and potentially leads me in directions I would not have considered otherwise. Very cool little book!
Also, this is probably going to be essential to making sense of Deleuze and Whitehead.
This is a really cool read and potentially leads me in directions I would not have considered otherwise. Very cool little book!
Also, this is probably going to be essential to making sense of Deleuze and Whitehead.
More...