You probably know that Russell misrepresented William James in similarly unfair ways, promoting a view of James as unserious because he took religious belief seriously and pragmatism as anti-science because it sketches the limits of instrumental reason.
Your book is waiting for me at my local bookstore. Thrilled it is arrived and that, thanks to you, Bergson is getting so much attention!
Now I'll have to dig around in boxes and find my old copy of Russell's History of Philosophy, I've apparently muddled what he had to say about metaphysics being in many ways much more interesting to him than questions of (pure) science. I've also put in a request for your book to be on our local library shelves and found they've already placed an order, but apparently the postal strike has it still delayed.
The idea that Bergson’s ideas did not endure are absurd. In fact, they are all around us even without Bergson himself being credited. Hannah Arendt, Marshall McLuhan, James Joyce, and many more. Heck, even the Catholic Church which banned his books would later go on to have a Pope heavily influenced by Bergson’s ideas!
I have always believed that Bertrand’s hating of James and Bergson was because he was Whitehead’s pupil, and Whitehead openly implemented and praised the work of both men.
Have you looked into Giles Deleuze’s constant reference to Bergson in nearly every work he wrote? Deleuze kept Bergson at the forefront of French philosophical thought throughout the 60s and 70s, especially in his two volumes on Cinema. For Deleuze’s approach to Bergson, See his book _Negotiations_, 6.
Let's hope that Bertrand Russell's time is coming to an end. He lost me when in his autobiography (I think) he said he struggled with Kant, but then simply declared, "Darn it, the external world exists." That isn't the way to end a metaphysical question!
Bertrand Russell, while a brilliant man in many ways, did a lot of damage to Philosophy in the Anglosphere.
You probably know that Russell misrepresented William James in similarly unfair ways, promoting a view of James as unserious because he took religious belief seriously and pragmatism as anti-science because it sketches the limits of instrumental reason.
Your book is waiting for me at my local bookstore. Thrilled it is arrived and that, thanks to you, Bergson is getting so much attention!
Now I'll have to dig around in boxes and find my old copy of Russell's History of Philosophy, I've apparently muddled what he had to say about metaphysics being in many ways much more interesting to him than questions of (pure) science. I've also put in a request for your book to be on our local library shelves and found they've already placed an order, but apparently the postal strike has it still delayed.
Well said. I asked my library to order a copy. Four are in order in local libraries in the north Chicago metropolitan area. Congratulations!
The idea that Bergson’s ideas did not endure are absurd. In fact, they are all around us even without Bergson himself being credited. Hannah Arendt, Marshall McLuhan, James Joyce, and many more. Heck, even the Catholic Church which banned his books would later go on to have a Pope heavily influenced by Bergson’s ideas!
I have always believed that Bertrand’s hating of James and Bergson was because he was Whitehead’s pupil, and Whitehead openly implemented and praised the work of both men.
As a biographer, this very much captured my own experience.
The work of Iain McGilchrist makes use of some of Bergson's thought. I highly recommend The Matter With Things.
Have you looked into Giles Deleuze’s constant reference to Bergson in nearly every work he wrote? Deleuze kept Bergson at the forefront of French philosophical thought throughout the 60s and 70s, especially in his two volumes on Cinema. For Deleuze’s approach to Bergson, See his book _Negotiations_, 6.
Let's hope that Bertrand Russell's time is coming to an end. He lost me when in his autobiography (I think) he said he struggled with Kant, but then simply declared, "Darn it, the external world exists." That isn't the way to end a metaphysical question!