Document Type : Research Paper
Author
ssistant Professor of Geography, Department of Geography, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
Abstract
Extended abstract
Introduction
Bergson and Deleuze were pioneer philosophers of time and space in the 20th century. Bergson and Deleuze distinguish between two kinds of time: spatialized time and real time or duration. Spatialized time is a time in which conscious states can be counted. This kind of time has been called spatialized time by Bergson and Deleuze because space is quantitative and countable. In contrast, real time or duration is the succession of our conscious states when we, as living beings, refrain from separating our present state from former states. Conscious states, in terms of duration philosophy, are qualitative and uncountable. Despite the central importance of the concept of duration, it seems that the concept of space occupies a marginal place in Bergson and Deleuze's philosophy. Duration, according to Bergson, is a nonspatial concept so that we can imagine it without space. Duration, as Deleuze conceptualizes it, is, like naturing nature, cause in itself. It is, according to Deleuze, the cause of its internal process of differentiation and qualitative multiplicity. Duration, conceptualized in such a way, proposes an atomic, individualistic and free-from-social-relation perspective to encounter duration. Although this perspective makes it possible to speak of “multiplicity of organization”, it is not able to provide a complementary organizational movement in the opposite direction, i.e. from a multiplicity of organization to unity of organization. Accordingly, the duration divides itself into divergent lines of differentiation and multiplicity.
Materials & Methods
The strategy of this paper was to play Bergson against Deleuze and Deleuze against Bergson to highlight the place of space in the philosophy of duration, and to introduce duration as a spatial construction. For this, this paper, following Deleuze, considered duration as a spatial simultaneity. Also, it, following Bergson, has argued that not only the cause of duration differentiation situates in space, but also space is the cause of duration differentiation. To do this, this paper, first analysed the metaphysical nature of space in Bergson's philosophy. In the next section, it was argued that space as a quantitative multiplicity is the cause of qualitative multiplicity and differentiation. Finally, in the third section, following Deleuze, the duration will be considered as a spatial simultaneity of moments.
Discussion & Result
This paper argued that Bergson has distinguished spatialized time from real time or duration only in reference to two different spatial metaphors. In other words, in transition from spatialized time to duration, he has replaced one spatial metaphor with another. Spatialized time is conceptualized as a separated succession of conscious states on a geometrical line, while duration is imagined as a non-separated succession of the moments on a geometrical point. Conscious states in terms of spatialized time are in juxtaposition with each other, while they all interpenetrate each other from the point of view of duration.
The latter metaphor is close to Deleuze's interpretation of the concept of duration. Duration, for Deleuze, is a spatial simultaneity of conscious states. To penetrate each other, moments need a point as a centre, and the centre necessarily produces its margins. The dialectics of centrality, i.e., the dialectics between the centre and margin, indicates that the concept of duration not only refers to the spatio-temporal simultaneity of moments but also the marginalization of certain moments and the centralization of others. Bergson’s famous metaphor of the cone supports this centre-margin-based interpretation. This paper has argued that the processes of centralization and marginalization are the results of socio-spatial construction.
Although duration, according to Deleuze, is a spatial concept, he ignores the causal effects of space on the process of differentiation. Duration, for Deleuze, is the cause of its internal differentiation. Duration, for him, is like a naturing nature and plays the role of an entirely independent variable from space. Space is treated as though it does not play any role in the qualitative differentiation of duration. In contrast to Deleuze, Bergson believed that the cause of the differentiation situates in space as a quantitative multiplicity. One way to speak of space as the cause of qualitative differentiation is to base it on relations between durations. This entails considering a particular duration as a moving object that moves forward unceasingly alongside different divergent lines of differentiation that continuously change their spatial arrangement in relation to each other. Depending on what kind of arrangements, a particular duration experiences different ways of differentiation. Accordingly, it can be argued that duration is not only in space but also by space.
Conclusion
This way of conceptualization allows us to highlight the place of space in the philosophy of duration, to speak of duration as a space of politics, and to transit it from a private sphere to a public sphere (i.e. socio-spatial constructionism). This way of conceptualization limits the freedom left to duration in Bergson's and Deleuze's philosophies.
Keywords
)