Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T19:20:40.292Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bergson and the Politics of Intuition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Judith Shklar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Political theory is not an independent realm of thought. Ultimately it must always refer back to some metaphysical presuppositions of Weltanschauung that is not in itself political. This does not imply that every metaphysical position entails logically necessary political consequences. But it does mean that implicitly or explicitly political theories depend on more general religious, epistemological, and moral considerations. This condition of political thinking serves to explain much of the narrowness of contemporary political theory. For the dominant currents of philosophy neither can, nor wish, to provide a basis for political speculation, which is increasingly regarded as an undisciplined form of self-expression. On the other hand, the naive hope that political studies might fruitfully emulate the methods of the natural sciences, and so share their success, has all but evaporated. The result is that political theory is now concerned to insist on its own limitations, to be critical and even negative in character. This is not a new thing. The lack of philosophical inspiration combined with the decline of “scientific” aspirations has plagued politically sensitive minds at least since the very beginning of the present century. And, from the first, one of the responses to this frustration has been the effort to escape philosophical difficulties by grasping at intuitive short-cuts to truth. The most remarkable of these flights to intuition was political Bergsonism. Moreover, this is not an entirely closed chapter in the history of ideas. Even if Bergson no longer enjoys his earlier popularity, he is still widely read, especially in America. Again, the recent vogue of existentialist “politics” points to an analogous trend, while the penchant for “action,” which is inherent in intuitive politics, is as strong as ever among French intellectuals.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , October 1958 , pp. 634 - 656
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1958

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For example, Hayek, F. A., The Counter-Revolution of Science (Glencoe, 1952)Google Scholar; Popper, K. R., The Open Society and Its Enemies (Princeton, 1950)Google Scholar; Voegelin, E., The New Science of Politics (Chicago, 1952).Google Scholar

2 Russell, B., The Philosophy of Bergson (Cambridge, 1914), pp. 15, 24, 33.Google Scholar

3 Dryssen, G., Bergson und die deutsche Romantik (Marburg, 1922)Google Scholar; Lovejoy, A., “Bergson and Romantic Evolutionism,” University of California Chronicles, Vol. 15 (1913), 429–487Google Scholar; Scharfstein, B.-A., The Roots of Bergson's Philosophy (New York, 1943), pp. 4–5, 129–132Google Scholar; Bergson, H., Creative Mind, tr. by Audison, M. L. (New York, 1946), pp. 33–34.Google Scholar

4 Creative Mind, pp. 99–100, 146–149Google Scholar; Creative Evolution, tr. by Mitchell, A. (Modern Library, New York, 1944), pp. 212–218Google Scholar; Chevalier, J., Henri Bergson, tr. by Clare, L. A. (New York, 1928).Google Scholar

5 Creative Mind, p. 103.Google Scholar

6 The Two Sources of Morality and Religion, tr. by Audra, R. A. and Brereton, C. (Anchor Books, New York, 1954), pp. 44–45.Google Scholar

7 La Philosophie (Paris, 1915), p. 7.Google Scholar

8 Creative Mind, pp. 17, 102Google Scholar; Creative Evolution, pp. 194–195.Google Scholar

9 James, W., A Pluralistic Universe (New York, 1909), pp. 262–263, 250–251, 225.Google Scholar

10 Creative Mind, pp. 28–29, 57–59Google Scholar; Creative Evolution, p. 210.Google Scholar

11 Bergson, H., Laughter, tr. by Brereton, C. & Rothwell, F. (New York, 1911), pp. 150–157Google Scholar; Creative Mind, pp. 52, 71.Google Scholar

12 Creative Mind, pp. 57–59.Google Scholar

13 Lovejoy, , op. cit., pp. 434–435.Google Scholar

14 James, W., Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results (Berkeley, Calif., 1898), p. 4.Google Scholar

15 Creative Evolution, pp. 194–203, 261, 287–289.Google Scholar

16 Two Sources, p. 118.Google Scholar

17 Creative Evolution, pp. 43–50, 63–64, 71–73, 85–86, 93–96, 99, 113–117, 187–188Google Scholar; Two Sources, pp. 29–30, 82–83, 127. Yet Bergson admired both Darwin and Lamarck, see La Philosophie, pp. 9–10.Google Scholar

18 Quoted in Perry, R. B., The Thought and Character of William James (Boston, 1935), II, 618Google Scholar. For an account of Bergson's popular success see, Chevalier, , op. cit., pp. 60–64.Google Scholar

19 Back to Methuselah, “Preface.”

20 Ibid., “Preface.”

21 Passfield, Lord, “Historic,” Fabian Essays, ed. by Shaw, G. B. (London, 1948), pp. 28–57.Google Scholar

22 James, W., Memories and Studies (New York, 1912), pp. 107–142.Google Scholar

23 The Wilt to Believe (New York, 1909), pp. 225–226, 232, 242–245.Google Scholar

24 The Two Sources, pp. 299, 292–293.Google Scholar

25 Creative Evolution, pp. 32–36, 114Google Scholar; Creative Mind, pp. 21–26.Google Scholar

26 Creative Mind, p. 121.Google Scholar

27 E.g., Bloch, Marc, The Historian's Craft, tr. by Putnam, P. (New York, 1953), pp. 190–197.Google Scholar

28 Creative Mind, pp. 21–26, 122–124.Google Scholar

29 Creative Evolution, pp. xx–xxv, 17, 43, 105–106, 181–182, 195, 254–256Google Scholar; Creative Mind, pp. 12–14.Google Scholar

30 Creative Evolution, pp. 8–10.Google Scholar

31 Perry, R. B., The Present Conflict of Ideas (New York, 1919), p. 348.Google Scholar

32 Bergson, , Time and Free Will, tr. by Pogson, F. L. (London, 1910), p. 172.Google Scholar

33 Ibid., pp. 167, 169–170.

34 Stewart, J. M.: A Critical Exposition of Bergson's Philosophy (London, 1911), pp. 254–255.Google Scholar

35 Bergson, H., The Meaning of the War, tr. by Carr, H. W. (London, 1915).Google Scholar

36 Le Mouvement Socialiste, Vol. 29 (1911), pp. 182–183, 267–269Google Scholar; Vol. 30 (1911), 120–123, 266–269; Vol. 31 (1912), 62–64, 132–133.

37 Sorel, G., De l'Utilité du Pragmatisme (Paris, 1921), p. 425.Google Scholar

38 See Elliott, W. Y., The Pragmatic Revolt in Politics (New York, 1928), pp. 111–113, 115 & 119–120Google Scholar, for an unusually perceptive account of the tenuous basis of Sorel's “Bergsonism.” However, see also, Jaques, R. S., “The Significance of Bergson for Recent Political Thought and Movements in France,” Royal Society of Canada, section II, 1932, pp. 5–12Google Scholar; Scott, J. W., Syndicalism and Philosophical Realism (London, 1919), pp. 40, 125–143, 161–163Google Scholar

39 Chevalier, , op. cit., pp. 64–65.Google Scholar

40 Péguy, Charles, Note sur M. Bergson et la Philosophie Bergsonienne. Note Conjointe sur M. Descartes et la Philosophie Cartesienne (Paris, 1935), pp. 299–300. (My translation.)Google Scholar

41 Pragmatisme, pp. 1–2, 123–127, 357–451Google Scholar; “L'Evolution Creatrice,” Le Mouvement Socialiste, Vol. 22 (1907), 257–282.Google Scholar

42 Sorel, G., Reflections on Violence, tr. by Hulme, T. E. (Glencoe, Ill., 1950), pp. 57–60Google Scholar; Humphrey, R., George Sorel (Cambridge, Mass., 1951), pp. 149–150, 163 & 167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

43 Reflections, pp. 144–145.Google Scholar

44 Quoted in Humphrey, R., op. cit., pp. 148–149Google Scholar; “L'Evolution Creatrice,” Le Mouvement Socialiste, Vol. 23 (1908), pp. 184–194Google Scholar; Reflections, pp. 53–56.Google Scholar

45 Reflections, p. 277Google Scholar; Humphrey, , op. cit., pp. 195–197.Google Scholar

46 Quoted in Humphrey, R., op. cit., pp. 89–90.Google Scholar

47 Ibid., pp. 155–156.

48 Humphrey, , op. cit., pp. 99, 153.Google Scholar

49 Humphrey, , op. cit., pp. 19–24, 36.Google Scholar

50 Ibid., pp. 95–99, 123–124.

51 Quoted in Humphrey, , op. cit., p. 56.Google Scholar

52 Reflections, pp. 148–149.Google Scholar

53 Quoted in Humphrey, , op. cit., p. 190.Google Scholar

54 Ibid., p. 194.

55 Péguy, Charles, La Republique notre Royaume de France, Textes politiques choisis, ed. by Mayer, Denise (Paris, 1946), pp. 182–185. (My translation.)Google Scholar

56 Reflections, pp. 59–60.Google Scholar

57 Ibid., pp. 144–145.

58 La Republique, pp. 151–152, 225–227.Google Scholar

59 Ibid., p. 237.

60 Ibid., pp. 185–191, 238–247, 322–324.

61 The Two Sources, pp. 118–140, 152–153, 204–208.Google Scholar

62 Humphrey, , op. cit., pp. 186–190, 120–121Google Scholar; Sorel, , Reflections, pp. 301–302, 303–311.Google Scholar

63 La Republique, pp. 298–301, 231.Google Scholar

64 Perry, , Character and Thought, II, 632–633.Google Scholar

65 Memories and Studies, pp. 286–288.Google Scholar

66 Quoted in Perry, , Thought and Character, II, 317.Google Scholar

67 Memories and Studies, pp. 300–301Google Scholar; Perry, , Thought and Character, II, pp. 270–271, 289–290, 299, 306–318.Google Scholar

68 Memories and Studies, pp. 287–288Google Scholar; Talks to Teachers on Psychology (New York, 1915), pp. 265–301.Google Scholar

69 Perry, , Thought and Character, II, 632–633Google Scholar; Bergson, , The Two Sources, p. 285.Google Scholar

70 Ibid., pp. 287–288; Chevalier, , op. cit., p. 72.Google Scholar

71 The Two Sources, pp. 50–52, 58.Google Scholar

72 Ibid., pp. 30–39, 68, 269.

73 The Two Sources, pp. 12–30, 85–97.Google Scholar

74 Ibid., p. 50.

75 Maritain, , Ransoming the Time, tr. by Binsse, H. L. (New York, 1941), pp. 93–95.Google Scholar

76 Laughter, pp. 44–47.Google Scholar

77 Two Sources, pp. 29–33, 56–58, 266–268.Google Scholar

78 Ibid., pp. 281–288.