앙리 베르그송 철학에서 지성의 역할과 한계 연구 : 『창조적 진화』를 중심으로 A study on the The Roles and Limits of Intelligence in Henri Bergson's Philosophy - Focused on Évolution créatrice원문보기
This paper aims to study the roles and limits of Bergson's intelligence. Bergson's philosophy is represented by duration which is doubtless alpha and omega on his philosophy. So it seems peripheral to research intelligence on the Bergsonism. But the fact that Bergson has focused on duration never me...
This paper aims to study the roles and limits of Bergson's intelligence. Bergson's philosophy is represented by duration which is doubtless alpha and omega on his philosophy. So it seems peripheral to research intelligence on the Bergsonism. But the fact that Bergson has focused on duration never mean abandoning or removing the rest of philosophical concepts or ideas, especially intelligence. Rather, in order to realize the meaning of duration, we must further clarify the meaning of intelligence. The strongest reason for it and our argument is based on that Bergsonian researchers interpreted Bergsonism only up to duration, ignoring Bergsonism is misunderstood as an Anti-intellectualism. Bergson is preferably an intellectualist. This idea is our preliminary question and that’s why we saw consciousness and duration first, according to Bergson's discussion, seeing the evolution of organism in its extension. Following Bergson’s evolutionary roads, we studied intelligence, fabrication, and tools focused on the concept of human being, ‘Homo faber’. Up to this point, it was the works of solving the first order, by making the misapprehension of Bergsonism right. And we examined one possibility which is the question that Bergson's intelligence is too narrow to explain modern society. As a result, we have found the "invention" which Bergson did not distinguish the concept of strictly, but at the same time the invention as a concept is possible in extension of Bergson’s philosophy by itself because of its ambiguity. Bergson used the term invention in Creative Evolution sometimes in the sense of creation, sometimes in the sense of fabrication, which ultimately seems to correspond to the concept of being able to go through the status that we endow with art. This discussion is rare in the Bergsonian studies, and little awkward approach to seeing Bergsonian philosophy. But as Bergson has criticized, for the philosophers who did the systematic philosophy like Kant, we have two choices. We can agree and believe on their own system or do the philosophy called a non-systematic philosophy rejecting theirs but evolving from Life. Bergson is the latter to be known. Dealing with this kind of philosophy proves its worth when it is likely to expand upon the contemporary debate. In this sense, Bergson's philosophy seems to be sufficient, and our work seems to have made a small achievement supporting it.
This paper aims to study the roles and limits of Bergson's intelligence. Bergson's philosophy is represented by duration which is doubtless alpha and omega on his philosophy. So it seems peripheral to research intelligence on the Bergsonism. But the fact that Bergson has focused on duration never mean abandoning or removing the rest of philosophical concepts or ideas, especially intelligence. Rather, in order to realize the meaning of duration, we must further clarify the meaning of intelligence. The strongest reason for it and our argument is based on that Bergsonian researchers interpreted Bergsonism only up to duration, ignoring Bergsonism is misunderstood as an Anti-intellectualism. Bergson is preferably an intellectualist. This idea is our preliminary question and that’s why we saw consciousness and duration first, according to Bergson's discussion, seeing the evolution of organism in its extension. Following Bergson’s evolutionary roads, we studied intelligence, fabrication, and tools focused on the concept of human being, ‘Homo faber’. Up to this point, it was the works of solving the first order, by making the misapprehension of Bergsonism right. And we examined one possibility which is the question that Bergson's intelligence is too narrow to explain modern society. As a result, we have found the "invention" which Bergson did not distinguish the concept of strictly, but at the same time the invention as a concept is possible in extension of Bergson’s philosophy by itself because of its ambiguity. Bergson used the term invention in Creative Evolution sometimes in the sense of creation, sometimes in the sense of fabrication, which ultimately seems to correspond to the concept of being able to go through the status that we endow with art. This discussion is rare in the Bergsonian studies, and little awkward approach to seeing Bergsonian philosophy. But as Bergson has criticized, for the philosophers who did the systematic philosophy like Kant, we have two choices. We can agree and believe on their own system or do the philosophy called a non-systematic philosophy rejecting theirs but evolving from Life. Bergson is the latter to be known. Dealing with this kind of philosophy proves its worth when it is likely to expand upon the contemporary debate. In this sense, Bergson's philosophy seems to be sufficient, and our work seems to have made a small achievement supporting it.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.