Rhythms and Drives: Quantal Ontology in Bergson’s and Nietzsche’s Naturalism

J. Meechan
{"title":"Rhythms and Drives: Quantal Ontology in Bergson’s and Nietzsche’s Naturalism","authors":"J. Meechan","doi":"10.5406/processstudies.49.1.0079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this article, I draw attention to some important points of intersection in the work of Henri Bergson and Friedrich Nietzsche. In particular, I focus on the overlapping nature of their naturalisms. This proves enlightening for an overall appreciation of their respective philosophical projects but also allows those projects to be inscribed within a broader set of naturalistic traditions to which I think they contribute in interesting ways. I begin by assessing how Bergson’s and Nietzsche’s general problematics are shaped by the antinaturalistic character of their targets, more specifically the appeals to the immobile and the unconditional that they expose in their critical approaches. I move on to examine the core components of their naturalistic responses, highlighting how both thinkers extend introspective insights about the psyche and the body to make claims regarding broader activity patterns across nature and ground these new monistic continua in their concepts of rhythms (Bergson) and drives (Nietzsche). Lastly, I draw out three important consequences on which these moves jointly converge, with particular emphasis on the “quantal” nature of the ontologies they outline. Moving beyond the comparative perspective, I conclude by using these points to situate Bergson and Nietzsche among three different lineages of naturalism: metaphysical, antireductionist, and Epicurean.","PeriodicalId":315123,"journal":{"name":"Process Studies","volume":"86 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Process Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5406/processstudies.49.1.0079","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, I draw attention to some important points of intersection in the work of Henri Bergson and Friedrich Nietzsche. In particular, I focus on the overlapping nature of their naturalisms. This proves enlightening for an overall appreciation of their respective philosophical projects but also allows those projects to be inscribed within a broader set of naturalistic traditions to which I think they contribute in interesting ways. I begin by assessing how Bergson’s and Nietzsche’s general problematics are shaped by the antinaturalistic character of their targets, more specifically the appeals to the immobile and the unconditional that they expose in their critical approaches. I move on to examine the core components of their naturalistic responses, highlighting how both thinkers extend introspective insights about the psyche and the body to make claims regarding broader activity patterns across nature and ground these new monistic continua in their concepts of rhythms (Bergson) and drives (Nietzsche). Lastly, I draw out three important consequences on which these moves jointly converge, with particular emphasis on the “quantal” nature of the ontologies they outline. Moving beyond the comparative perspective, I conclude by using these points to situate Bergson and Nietzsche among three different lineages of naturalism: metaphysical, antireductionist, and Epicurean.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
节奏与驱力:柏格森与尼采自然主义中的量子本体论
在这篇文章中,我提请注意亨利·柏格森和弗里德里希·尼采作品中的一些重要交叉点。我特别关注他们自然主义的重叠性。这证明了对他们各自哲学项目的整体欣赏是有启发的,但也允许这些项目被纳入更广泛的自然主义传统中,我认为他们以有趣的方式做出了贡献。我首先评估柏格森和尼采的一般问题论是如何被他们的目标的反自然主义特征所塑造的,更具体地说,是他们在批判方法中暴露的对不动和无条件的呼吁。我继续研究他们自然主义反应的核心组成部分,强调两位思想家如何扩展对心灵和身体的内省见解,以提出有关自然界更广泛的活动模式的主张,并将这些新的一元论连续体建立在他们的节奏(柏格森)和动力(尼采)的概念中。最后,我列出了这些行动共同汇聚的三个重要结果,特别强调了它们概述的本体论的“量子”性质。超越比较的视角,我用这些观点来总结柏格森和尼采在三个不同的自然主义谱系中的地位:形而上学的,反还原论的和伊壁鸠鲁的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Whitehead's Ethics: Fill in the Blanks From a Philosophy of Evolution to a Philosophy of Organism Standing Firm in the Flux: On Whitehead's Eternal Objects Starting With Whitehead: Raising Children to Thrive in Treacherous Times The Open Future: Why Future Contingents Are All False
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1