"ELAN VITAL" - The Philosophy of Henri Bergson
Ever since the 1859 publishing of Charles Darwin's "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection," scholars, theologians, philosophers, and other intellectuals friendly to faith in God (or some sort of "Prime Mover") have been at odds to articulate a "middle ground"; a rapprochement between faith (and the deductive reasoning that supports it) and materialism (the idea that the matter we observe every day is all there is to the Universe; there is no "room" for belief in a God, etc.). It should be noted, as I have stated in other essays, that Charles Darwin himself was a Seminary student (Church of England) and son of a clergyman. His exhaustive research of biology led him, however, to some "inconvenient truths," which he wrestled with mightily over the course of his life. The story is very well known to those of us who are students of human thought.
Darwin, in his outstanding work (if you haven't read it, you need to), admittedly had no answer to the two overarching questions of existence: 1.) the origin of matter (why is there "something" rather than "nothing"?) and 2.) the origin of consciousness (why should a human reason, think, and be self-aware? Where does this come from and why do we have these faculties?). But his theories of natural selection, "change through time" of species (acted upon by exogenous events, most often, in a random way), and survival of the fittest are really beyond doubt. Of course, his was a more "gradualist" view (much easier for the Church to reconcile with biblical revelation), as opposed to the predominant view of our era, which is that of "punctuated equilibrium." (Gradualism being an illusion, and exogenous - or environmental - shocks providing the catalysts for evolution in - and this is critically important to understand - a completely random way.)
Henri Bergson, French philosopher and writer during the turn of the 20th century era (he lived from 1859-1941), was one of the major figures whose thinking and writing attempted to span the bridge between reason and faith; revealed science and what he termed "dynamic" religion (an advanced religious expression epitomized by mysticism, or those more advanced along the spiritual path in his view; in short: evolution and creation). Bergson's work is very thoughtful and insightful, and his leitmotiv is his expression of the elan vital; literally the "vital force," or "life force," or ""vital impulse" which is the substance of consciousness and nature. His magnum opus - "The Two Sources of Morality and Religion" - has served as a reflective soundboard for some of my thinking on this subject, and was written near the end of his life as a culmination of his work and thought. (The book was first published in France in 1932; released in English in 1935; and very representative of the thought of the time.)
The truth is, for both sides, there are significant "inconvenient truths." The pure, or as I call them "hard core" (or "orthodox") evolutionists absolutely cannot answer the two questions I stated above: 1.) what is the origin of matter? (it cannot come about of itself; there is no cause/effect relationship, etc., no Creator or "shaper" of the matter) and 2.) what is the origin of consciousness? (that beings can think, reason, fly airplanes and spaceships, compute the launch and orbit of satellites and spacecraft, compose Mahler symphonies, etc.!). The inconvenient truths for Bible believing Christians are the proven Darwinian tenets of natural selection; the inherent cruelty of nature and the animal kingdom (the killing of the young in several species in favor of the "strongest"e.g.; not to mention impact events, such as comets, asteroids, etc. that have monumental catastrophic damage to life) - basically, survival of the fittest. (Not to mention the demonstrable adaptive "changes through time" affecting all species.)
It should be mentioned that for thinking Christians, these have long since ceased to be ontological "problems." In fact, I don't think of them as "problems" for a tenable faith at all. They are observable, repeatable, testable facts. One must not think of the Bible and revealed scripture as a "science textbook," or biology or astronomy textbook. When one is liberated from that, an enormous, heavy burden of ontological problems is lifted. (So sorry for you if you are still carrying those, as I once did.) Moreover, the Bible should also not be looked upon as a "play by play" prophecy road map (in a very deterministic fashion) that "predicts" all present and future events to the letter; a foretelling of the "end of the world" as we know it. But that, perhaps, is an essay for another day.
Bergson's work still stands. He very cleverly articulated good reasons why the "life force" is the most significant thing about existence on this planet (in the Universe at large, I should add). Why should there be consciousness? Why are human beings (and other species) social in nature? We form into groups, we develop economies (actually the Greek is informative here, as "oikonomia" denotes actually a "household," the first "economic unit" of early humans), we unite around shared goals, we develop myths about gods doing this and that, we sacrifice things of value to appease these gods (the origin of animal sacrifice, plants and monetary sacrifices, etc.), we appoint priests and various holy men and women, we develop orders for them to enroll in and "be separate" from the hoi polloi, and pretty soon (think back to the Greeks and Romans), we have a pantheon of multiple gods who behave - not surprisingly - pretty much like us! Of course, the rest of the story is the move toward monotheism, of which we in the Judeo-Christian tradition are the inheritors.
Bergson simplified all of this into an identifiable evolution from "closed societies" (such as various tribal groups and theocracies) into "open societies" (such as our present day open and diverse democracies). For Bergson, evolution had a purpose; it culminated into two large groups of creation: hymenoptera(social insects, such as bees, ants, et.al.) and vertebrates (such as humans) who could think and had self-awareness; and intelligence. Evolution, for Bergson, was all about "Creative Evolution" then. It seemed to be following a "plan" or purpose which nurtured - over great lengths of time and creative "process" - the formulating of intelligence for survival purposes but ultimately for myriad creativity, which was reflective of its designer (the Creator). Bergson, in a sense, was a member of the "Intelligent Design" camp (as am I) before it was "cool" (to borrow a song title from country singer Barbara Mandrell). In fact, Bergsonian thought ("creative evolution") is very much an "ally" with the modern "intelligent design" camp and the stream of its thought feeds directly into it like a river.
Of course, communities of humans need to establish laws and moral codes; hence, the evolution of priests and lawyers to interpret and administer these codes, developed over tens of thousands of years living in community with other humans (and early primates). Moreover, as Bergson emphasizes, humans are self-aware and able to contemplate their own death, something that most other species cannot do (they operate by instinct alone - the hymenoptera, e.g.). We then set about the task of "making sense" of this - why should we die, what happens to us afterward (if anything), is there meaning to life then?, etc. Hence, the origin, in Bergson's view, of religion, manifested in human experience first by "static religion" (characterized by rigid, closed communities and thought, and rank superstition); and its more highly-evolved version (over the past three millennia - in both east and west), termed by Bergson "dynamic religion." And for Bergson, the most highly advanced practitioners of this dynamic religion were/are the "mystics" (whether east or west, Bergson was universalist and ecumenical), whose pursuit of ultimate truth led them to "open up to the divine" and experience the love of God (a big theme in Bergson's work) in a very personal way; therefore radiating that love of God out to fellow human beings.
His is a view then of a patient Creator, with limitless creative power and love towards his creatures (as God himself is social and wishes for community with his creatures) which is the apex of his work. Really, this sums up the experience of Christianity, which evolved from the (arguably) "static," rigid, and closed community of its day (Pharasaic Judaism) into "the Way" (as it was known in the first century - cf. the Book of Acts), or as it was later called (first at Antioch, later in the first century, according to Acts) "Christianity." Christianity is by nature diverse (cf. the Pentecost episode of the Holy Spirit's falling on the community of believers in Acts 2), accepting (open to both "Jew and Gentile" in Paul's expression), evangelical, and "creative." It has helped to ameliorate innumerable social wrongs (still does) and injustices, and has helped to civilize otherwise war-like cultures (cf. the conversion of the Viking societies, among many others), help establish the rule of law, democracy, individual dignity for people ( and hence the importance of life), Capitalism (sometimes with a "socialistic conscience") and on and on...
In a sense then, and in Bergson's words, natural evolution has been a creative God's way of "creating creators," who through religion have helped advance human consciousness towards a more magnanimous and just society; beings who are (ideally) destined to "love and be loved," which is the highest expression of human life. Bergson's view, then, is one of optimism; an optimism that human beings can ultimately rise above ignorance, hate, prejudice, and the closed societies and "static," superstitious religions that he felt was their source.
Moreover, Bergson posits democratic governments as the modern telos (or goal) of human political evolution; the modern "big bangs" of which were the American and French Revolutions. These fostered the movement toward more fair and truly representative governments, as opposed to the ancient Greek democracies, which he believed were "untrue" and tainted by slavery. (Obviously, both of the modern revolutions had to deal with this subject head on, and the seeds of liberation for both slaves and women were planted in the American Revolution; it was something that the Founding Fathers grappled with from the beginning.)
In this type of government, "we the people" are consequently "sovereign." Bergson, much like Teilhard de Chardin (whose thought is somewhat similar and is another exponent of "creative evolution"), found hope in the founding of the League of Nations; an institution he surely hoped could help ameliorate the human tendency toward catastrophic wars (he was deeply impacted by WWI, as were all Europeans).
In Bergson's own words: "democracy is evangelical in essence and its motive power is love." (from his "Final Remarks" section) For him, God exists; He is creative in nature, He wished to commune with his creation through creative beings, and He is the source of the motive power of all life - love - and this love is radiated through the created Universe and then radiated back and out again through His intelligent beings. Thus, in his own words: " joy and optimism are diffused throughout the world by an ever-spreading mystic intuition." Do human beings truly want to "live" and have that "abundant life"? It is in their own hands, since they have free will. He closes his work with an astonishing statement, that the Universe's "essential function is as a machine for the making of gods." (cf. Psalm 82:6!) Properly understood in the context of Bergson's thought, this expression is best understood as a culmination of the "life/vital force," the elan vital blooming within a Universe of otherwise lifeless matter and expressing itself in creativity and love; hence, a Universe evolving creatively, and one which we need not fear...
TTC
Darwin, in his outstanding work (if you haven't read it, you need to), admittedly had no answer to the two overarching questions of existence: 1.) the origin of matter (why is there "something" rather than "nothing"?) and 2.) the origin of consciousness (why should a human reason, think, and be self-aware? Where does this come from and why do we have these faculties?). But his theories of natural selection, "change through time" of species (acted upon by exogenous events, most often, in a random way), and survival of the fittest are really beyond doubt. Of course, his was a more "gradualist" view (much easier for the Church to reconcile with biblical revelation), as opposed to the predominant view of our era, which is that of "punctuated equilibrium." (Gradualism being an illusion, and exogenous - or environmental - shocks providing the catalysts for evolution in - and this is critically important to understand - a completely random way.)
Henri Bergson, French philosopher and writer during the turn of the 20th century era (he lived from 1859-1941), was one of the major figures whose thinking and writing attempted to span the bridge between reason and faith; revealed science and what he termed "dynamic" religion (an advanced religious expression epitomized by mysticism, or those more advanced along the spiritual path in his view; in short: evolution and creation). Bergson's work is very thoughtful and insightful, and his leitmotiv is his expression of the elan vital; literally the "vital force," or "life force," or ""vital impulse" which is the substance of consciousness and nature. His magnum opus - "The Two Sources of Morality and Religion" - has served as a reflective soundboard for some of my thinking on this subject, and was written near the end of his life as a culmination of his work and thought. (The book was first published in France in 1932; released in English in 1935; and very representative of the thought of the time.)
The truth is, for both sides, there are significant "inconvenient truths." The pure, or as I call them "hard core" (or "orthodox") evolutionists absolutely cannot answer the two questions I stated above: 1.) what is the origin of matter? (it cannot come about of itself; there is no cause/effect relationship, etc., no Creator or "shaper" of the matter) and 2.) what is the origin of consciousness? (that beings can think, reason, fly airplanes and spaceships, compute the launch and orbit of satellites and spacecraft, compose Mahler symphonies, etc.!). The inconvenient truths for Bible believing Christians are the proven Darwinian tenets of natural selection; the inherent cruelty of nature and the animal kingdom (the killing of the young in several species in favor of the "strongest"e.g.; not to mention impact events, such as comets, asteroids, etc. that have monumental catastrophic damage to life) - basically, survival of the fittest. (Not to mention the demonstrable adaptive "changes through time" affecting all species.)
It should be mentioned that for thinking Christians, these have long since ceased to be ontological "problems." In fact, I don't think of them as "problems" for a tenable faith at all. They are observable, repeatable, testable facts. One must not think of the Bible and revealed scripture as a "science textbook," or biology or astronomy textbook. When one is liberated from that, an enormous, heavy burden of ontological problems is lifted. (So sorry for you if you are still carrying those, as I once did.) Moreover, the Bible should also not be looked upon as a "play by play" prophecy road map (in a very deterministic fashion) that "predicts" all present and future events to the letter; a foretelling of the "end of the world" as we know it. But that, perhaps, is an essay for another day.
Bergson's work still stands. He very cleverly articulated good reasons why the "life force" is the most significant thing about existence on this planet (in the Universe at large, I should add). Why should there be consciousness? Why are human beings (and other species) social in nature? We form into groups, we develop economies (actually the Greek is informative here, as "oikonomia" denotes actually a "household," the first "economic unit" of early humans), we unite around shared goals, we develop myths about gods doing this and that, we sacrifice things of value to appease these gods (the origin of animal sacrifice, plants and monetary sacrifices, etc.), we appoint priests and various holy men and women, we develop orders for them to enroll in and "be separate" from the hoi polloi, and pretty soon (think back to the Greeks and Romans), we have a pantheon of multiple gods who behave - not surprisingly - pretty much like us! Of course, the rest of the story is the move toward monotheism, of which we in the Judeo-Christian tradition are the inheritors.
Bergson simplified all of this into an identifiable evolution from "closed societies" (such as various tribal groups and theocracies) into "open societies" (such as our present day open and diverse democracies). For Bergson, evolution had a purpose; it culminated into two large groups of creation: hymenoptera(social insects, such as bees, ants, et.al.) and vertebrates (such as humans) who could think and had self-awareness; and intelligence. Evolution, for Bergson, was all about "Creative Evolution" then. It seemed to be following a "plan" or purpose which nurtured - over great lengths of time and creative "process" - the formulating of intelligence for survival purposes but ultimately for myriad creativity, which was reflective of its designer (the Creator). Bergson, in a sense, was a member of the "Intelligent Design" camp (as am I) before it was "cool" (to borrow a song title from country singer Barbara Mandrell). In fact, Bergsonian thought ("creative evolution") is very much an "ally" with the modern "intelligent design" camp and the stream of its thought feeds directly into it like a river.
Of course, communities of humans need to establish laws and moral codes; hence, the evolution of priests and lawyers to interpret and administer these codes, developed over tens of thousands of years living in community with other humans (and early primates). Moreover, as Bergson emphasizes, humans are self-aware and able to contemplate their own death, something that most other species cannot do (they operate by instinct alone - the hymenoptera, e.g.). We then set about the task of "making sense" of this - why should we die, what happens to us afterward (if anything), is there meaning to life then?, etc. Hence, the origin, in Bergson's view, of religion, manifested in human experience first by "static religion" (characterized by rigid, closed communities and thought, and rank superstition); and its more highly-evolved version (over the past three millennia - in both east and west), termed by Bergson "dynamic religion." And for Bergson, the most highly advanced practitioners of this dynamic religion were/are the "mystics" (whether east or west, Bergson was universalist and ecumenical), whose pursuit of ultimate truth led them to "open up to the divine" and experience the love of God (a big theme in Bergson's work) in a very personal way; therefore radiating that love of God out to fellow human beings.
His is a view then of a patient Creator, with limitless creative power and love towards his creatures (as God himself is social and wishes for community with his creatures) which is the apex of his work. Really, this sums up the experience of Christianity, which evolved from the (arguably) "static," rigid, and closed community of its day (Pharasaic Judaism) into "the Way" (as it was known in the first century - cf. the Book of Acts), or as it was later called (first at Antioch, later in the first century, according to Acts) "Christianity." Christianity is by nature diverse (cf. the Pentecost episode of the Holy Spirit's falling on the community of believers in Acts 2), accepting (open to both "Jew and Gentile" in Paul's expression), evangelical, and "creative." It has helped to ameliorate innumerable social wrongs (still does) and injustices, and has helped to civilize otherwise war-like cultures (cf. the conversion of the Viking societies, among many others), help establish the rule of law, democracy, individual dignity for people ( and hence the importance of life), Capitalism (sometimes with a "socialistic conscience") and on and on...
In a sense then, and in Bergson's words, natural evolution has been a creative God's way of "creating creators," who through religion have helped advance human consciousness towards a more magnanimous and just society; beings who are (ideally) destined to "love and be loved," which is the highest expression of human life. Bergson's view, then, is one of optimism; an optimism that human beings can ultimately rise above ignorance, hate, prejudice, and the closed societies and "static," superstitious religions that he felt was their source.
Moreover, Bergson posits democratic governments as the modern telos (or goal) of human political evolution; the modern "big bangs" of which were the American and French Revolutions. These fostered the movement toward more fair and truly representative governments, as opposed to the ancient Greek democracies, which he believed were "untrue" and tainted by slavery. (Obviously, both of the modern revolutions had to deal with this subject head on, and the seeds of liberation for both slaves and women were planted in the American Revolution; it was something that the Founding Fathers grappled with from the beginning.)
In this type of government, "we the people" are consequently "sovereign." Bergson, much like Teilhard de Chardin (whose thought is somewhat similar and is another exponent of "creative evolution"), found hope in the founding of the League of Nations; an institution he surely hoped could help ameliorate the human tendency toward catastrophic wars (he was deeply impacted by WWI, as were all Europeans).
In Bergson's own words: "democracy is evangelical in essence and its motive power is love." (from his "Final Remarks" section) For him, God exists; He is creative in nature, He wished to commune with his creation through creative beings, and He is the source of the motive power of all life - love - and this love is radiated through the created Universe and then radiated back and out again through His intelligent beings. Thus, in his own words: " joy and optimism are diffused throughout the world by an ever-spreading mystic intuition." Do human beings truly want to "live" and have that "abundant life"? It is in their own hands, since they have free will. He closes his work with an astonishing statement, that the Universe's "essential function is as a machine for the making of gods." (cf. Psalm 82:6!) Properly understood in the context of Bergson's thought, this expression is best understood as a culmination of the "life/vital force," the elan vital blooming within a Universe of otherwise lifeless matter and expressing itself in creativity and love; hence, a Universe evolving creatively, and one which we need not fear...
TTC
posted by thoughtful conservative at 10:15 AM
0 comments
