Nicolai Stravrogin, a character in Dostoevsky's novel "The Possessed", could be seen as an answer to Stirner's Conscious Egoism. Stavrogin realises that his ego (self) is nothing but the product of instinct mitigated by enculturation.

In Ayn Rand's "The Virtue of Selfishness: A New Concept of Egoism", two chapters by her colleague, Nathaniel Branden, are severely critical of Stirner and Nietzsche. Chapter 5: 'Isn't Everyone Selfish'. Chapter 18: 'Counterfeit Individualism'.

Great. Thank you. I must read Bergson.

Interesting that you guys are big on Bruno. I never read it because it seems to have been seldom cited by commentators before mid last century. I have a reason to delve into it now, thank you!

Thanks Dr. Lamb for once more into the breach, taking us through the main stages of Marx and Marxist thought in his works: I think the young Marx was probably a philosopher/ humanist/idealist, the later Marx changed from interpretation to change through social/economic/ sociological means. So he emancipated himself from philosophy altogether.

Thanks for this discussion Dr. Emily Herring and Chris for hosting it. It seems the idea of 'intuition has to be fought for and freed from the clutches of the masculine analyticals like Russell and Einstein, the world of the spacial conceptualists. Wyndem Lewis in literature fought his own rear-guard action vs. people like DH Lawrence, whom he regarded as passive and feminine and unconscious. Of course the true coup de grass was delivered by the mathematical quantifiers like Bertrand Russell, who had his own battles with DHL., who practically rendered Bergsonian philosophy as spiritualist and mystical in A History Of Western Philosophy. Einstein famously said time does not exist( maybe he was bad at mathematics!), which I think is demonstrably false. Russell's machine-like intellect puts Bergson's idea of time and consciousness through the mincer, the duree and memory. Castigating his philosophy as anti-intellectual and anti-mechanical, not fostering of the 'true contemplation' of real philosophy. Of course Bergson's vitalist philosphy found a real home with the creative artists like Proust, famous on memory. I think Bergson's ideas were not absorbed into the mainstream, because they could not be understood intellectually, were liable to be misunderstood or seen as something else, had no system which could be looked at objectively.

Wonderful conversation, Edith Stein always occupied a vague space in my mind but I can see how important she is not only to phenomenology but to the field of psychoanalysis. No wonder she is one of the patron saints of Europe! Also I love 53:30, I need think more thoroughly about this "individuated essences" / "essential particularity" idea. I am curious why Dr. Calcagno thinks Scotus (but not Thomas Aquinas and Husserl) would follow Stein's "essence of a radical particularity"?

I've this strange relationship to Husserl; My professor was Lothar Udert and his Professor was Eugen Fink, the last assistant of Edmund Husserl. What I like most about him, apart from his philosophy is that through the books you can watch him learning. And he is not afraid to share it with you, and be it a hundred years later

I agree with the last recommendation. Riddles of Philosophy is very well written (in the German version, that I know) and an excellent overview

Thank you so much for hosting these presentations, it's really food for my mind to hear scholars passionate about ideas. It's also restful to have two heads talking without any flashy zooming in and out and changing angles like some platforms use. The ideas and thinking are enough. Really appreciate having your whole series to roam through and listen to. Thanks and happy new year to you and for your work.

Thank you for this interview; it was very enlightening.

Thank you. Dr Calcagno has a great gift od dissecting dense philosophical problems and explaining them in such a way that they become perfectly clear. As for Stein, I've been reading her works for the last 20 years and am greatly impressed by her intellectual and spiritual intensity (I don't know how to call it, really). What I find strange is that so many philosophers find her controversial because of her eventual turn toward Thomistic scholasticism. I'm not a Catholic but it seems pretty obvious to me that Husserl's and Aquinas's ideas are similar if not identical - to arrive at the immediate sense of reality. Phenomenological reduction is a spiritual activity per se - it is an existential enterprise in the course of which you put into doubt everything, including your own self. So I guess that isolating Stein's early work is wrong - her later books (on Thomas Aquinas, on Pseudo-Dionysius, on St John of the Cross) seem to me natural consequences of hear early interests and fascinations. We don't have to be Catholics to see and appreciate this.

This was great. I have studied Kant and Hegel, but this offered me a new perspective with which to approach Schelling.

Enjoying Dr. Herring's book, which I learned about right here.

<<You do not get the same cause twice in consciousness>>. Fallacious argument since strickly speaking <the same cause , or exactly the same situation never occured twice. Science is possible because as long as a situation is similar in term of its model to another situation than th conclusion of the model in both cases will be the same in terms of the model. Bergson opposes scientism which was called positism in his time, i.e. oppose the claim that reality could be fully in principle understood scientifically and his first realisation in this direction was the realisation that the time of physics did not correspond to our intuitive notion of time in our consciousness or living experience. He had eventually to confront the cutting edge of the scientistic project of his time, the limitation of the theories of evolution of his time. The difficulty to understand his philosophy then and now is that the core of it is not an explanation of how the world work but a attempt to bring us out of the illusion that the world is a big clock, to break the spell of scientism. We are collectively much more zombified into scientism than people were in the time of Bergson although there is a huge amount of work that went in the direction of breaking this spell but this are rare individualist efforts that no institution have ever tried to build upon since it goes against a very powerfull societal zeitgeist.

At the end, Dr. Calcagno seems to be creeping up on a kind of determinism.

I recently discovered Edith Stein’s work and I’m very happy to have this opportunity to listen to Dr. Calcagno 😊

Einstein won the popularity contest no doubt because his thought led directly to technological inventions that have indeed changed the world. But Bergson ought not to be overlooked. I'm glad to learn of Dr. Herring's work. I read The Physicist & The Philosopher, the book by Jimena Canales focusing on the debate between Bergson and Einstein. Bergson's theory of duration, of experienced time, was reduced to a psychological effect by a misunderstanding and Einstein's unwillingness to engage it. Ideas change, and Bergson's may yet be revived.

Creative Evolution was the happiest book I've read. I mean I found it the most uplifting at the time, especially after overdosing on Schopenhauer.

10

Thank you. “The Trial” captured my imagination and hasn’t let go, but now I see Kafka’s aphorisms have the same effect. According to Luria, the Kabbalist,when God poured his divine light into the vessels that were the foundations of the world, his light was so powerful that the vessels shattered. Consequently, this world is cracked and broken. But every shard of the vessel carries a spark of divine light. Kafka uncovered lights in fragments of the broken world.

“The time of the philosophers doesn’t exist.” Einstein was famously a fan of the philosopher Spinoza according to whom time is not a fundamental reality, but rather a concept derived from our perception of the changing modes of the one substance ("God or Nature") which is eternal and timeless. So time doesn’t exist. Augustine and Kant and many a perennialist reached the same conclusion about time. Why didn’t Bergson get the double entendre? Did he have too much at stake in the debate and lose his sense of humor?

I just found your channel enjoying Dr. Emily Herring's discussion about Henri Bergson, and now a discussion of Rudolf Steiner. Although I'm certainly not a scholar of his works, I was really into reading Steiner in my late teens and early 20s. Really cool listening to Matt's discussion here.

When Emily was describing how Bergson was being attacked for his philosophy as being irrational and feminine, I thought of how that conflict is playing out in US culture today with the rise of the far right's views upholding hyper-masculinity and a return to a patriarchal society.

Well done, Emily. I first came upon Bergson on the Aeon site: Henri Bergson-celebrity. Curious why he is no longer studied in the Anglo/Analytical tradition. I will add him to the syllabus for my upcoming Intro to Philosophy course. again, merci beaucoup for bringing attention to who might be one of the most prominent overlooked philosophers in the Anglophone academic world.

Glad you mentioned Deleuze right at the end there - Bergson is all over and under and through Deleuze, a ‘vital’ influence. I too studied at Leeds uni (mid 1970s),drinkingTetley’s mild in the Whip pub, a favourite haunt of derelicts and Deleuzians avant la lettre…, who knows what forgotten intoxicated conversation was unknowingly laced with unwitting Bergsonism, not least the ringing of ‘last orders’ bell, a sonic bearer of duree. Dr Emily is a cool communicator - not an easy trick to pull off but she’s got it down pat.

Interesting, and enjoyable discussion. I subscribed and shared the video. Thank you.

Idealists are always out of their minds believing in some transcendental explanation and origin for the universe. We will stay eternally trapped in Platos cave. Time to use Aristotelian rationality and Logic and free ourselves from the shackles of this witchcraft and superstition. Gnosticism, Hermeticism, Religionism, Fascism, Nazism, Communism to Wokeism all stem from the same Origin. Platos Cave. THE BELIEF IN A PERFECT REALM THAT DOESN'T EXIST. ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS USE HEGELIAN DIALECTIC TO FORCE A SQUARE INTO A ROUND PEG. You are all certifiably mentally deranged.

More Platonic delusion. Mysticism and superstition parading as intellect. From Plato to Kant to the current Woke Mob, it seems that mankind in not inclined to use it's greatest tool of Rationality to interpret the Universe. Study Aristotle. Wake TFU.

I've read articles saying that some chinese neo-confucianists were pretty inspired by Bergson, in contrast with Russell who embodied a cold rational philosophy, the philosophy of Bergson felt more in line with elements of confucianism The idea of durée or duration, it mixes well with a form of mystique, of transformation and harmony Also, there is a moral and spiritual aspects (but like the Dr. Herring said not an occult-y spirituality) to his writings (that isn't as present in russell), the community, the relationships between humans. Sorbonne is pronounced like Bergson, or the english word "on" or like "what's going ON" Sorb-"on"

My first few seconds: his name is pronounced like dill thai

Husserl was born the same year, and I see much more in common between the two of them, happily

Thank you all for being so kind in the comments! And thanks again to Chris for being such a wonderful host!

Interesting discussion. Dr. Herring is an excellent communicator

In my opinion, Matter and Memory is the greatest book on consciousness ever written. Creative Evolution is also a masterpiece.

Always impressed with the level of specialization and depth of study from your guests-on the ideas and mind of even one thinker. Manner of gesticulating and interest in the subject I find most charming. Your intelligence, or 'consideration'-analytical, creative, emotional, practical, intuitive, spiritual-most appealing. Bergson makes clear the context of time for those later like Leo Strauss (e.g. critique of the fact-value distinction).

I need to get a Valet so I can attend a Bergsonian talk but Dr. Emily Herring. hahaha. Fascinating. thanks

How utterly infectious and endearing. Thank you!

it would be nice to have a public lecturing college where i live.... why dont we have those in the usa? or, if we do, im not aware of them... that is, without students, college du france @7:00

What a fabulous interview, I have much to ponder, thanks for this!

Interesting discussion about the indeterminacy of creativity/freedom vs the determinacy of teleology and of mechanization. I had no idea Einstein threw shade at Bergson like that. And the Cartesians in France treated him horribly. We need a return to Bergsonmania! I can't wait to read more of Dr. Herring, another stellar interview Chris!

wow! her explanation of the difference between mathematical time and duree was incredible. thanks for a fantastic discussion.

Thank you both for this interview! I am hoping to read this (very exciting!) book sometime in 2025. Wishing you (Christopher), Emily, and the Young Idealist audience a very happy holiday.

As this developed I kept thinking of the concerns Dr Ian McGilchrist has about the imbalance of our thinking which has become diminished by obveruse of left brain thinking. I ve heard him say that the way we educate people has to change. This made me imagine the potential and relevance of the Jena group now in re-education. Thank you both so much for this explosion of thinking....

What a fantastic discussion, thanks to both of you