Experiencing time in continuous and discrete ways
Sonja Deppe
Reflections on time, both in contexts of metaphysics and in experience of time, encounter a certain tension between continuous and discrete aspects of time. On the one hand, we experience time as continuously flowing; on the other hand, we have a strong tendency to explain time referring to separate instants of time, discrete objects, and their different states. In my talk, I will present and explain an often neglected perspective on the matter, namely the approach of the French philosopher Henri Bergson.
In his analysis of temporal experience, Bergson yields an understanding of the two aspects of time that leads to an overall picture of time and our experience of it: For him, continuity is a crucial feature of our experience of time, and even more, temporal continuity is a crucial feature of our experience in general. Thereby, the temporal continuity – the “duration” in Bergson’s words – is directly connected with the qualitative aspect of experience: The way I perceive a certain sound in a piece of music – such as the harmonic resolution of a dissonance – can’t be understood by isolating the one sound from the others. The present moment can’t be understood by itself but rather as developing continuously out of preceding moments. Furthermore, continuity is a basic feature in Bergson’s overall view of temporal process-related reality.
Up to this point it is true that Bergson takes a firm stand in favour of a continuous view of temporal experience. At the same time, however, he gives a detailed and interesting analysis of our tendency to cope with our own durational experience in a way that introduces discrete forms of access to time and to temporal processes. For him, it is the context of acting that demands to “cut” the temporal continuity into fixed objects of differentiated states, situated at instantaneous points of time. Bergson compares the tendency to access temporal phenomena in this way with the mechanism of a film camera, taking instantaneous pictures out of the continuous progression of events to be filmed.
In his view, such a fragmentation of temporal processes does not only happen in the context of our analytical reflection but already in the context of our perception. After all we can say that this discrete way of approaching temporal processing is a basic and very natural part of our experience as well. So even if Bergson takes the continuity of time for more fundamental, he sees both our continuous experience of time and our discrete way of grasping it as related parts in the bigger context of our being incorporated in temporal processuality.
After reconstructing Bergson’s approach, I will consider its possible implications for the contemporary analytic debates about time, and show that it might open new perspectives on the reasoning about experience and ontology of time. For instance, concerning the issue of temporal passage, Bergson might help to bridge the gap between certain contrary intuitions of experience and ontology.
In his analysis of temporal experience, Bergson yields an understanding of the two aspects of time that leads to an overall picture of time and our experience of it: For him, continuity is a crucial feature of our experience of time, and even more, temporal continuity is a crucial feature of our experience in general. Thereby, the temporal continuity – the “duration” in Bergson’s words – is directly connected with the qualitative aspect of experience: The way I perceive a certain sound in a piece of music – such as the harmonic resolution of a dissonance – can’t be understood by isolating the one sound from the others. The present moment can’t be understood by itself but rather as developing continuously out of preceding moments. Furthermore, continuity is a basic feature in Bergson’s overall view of temporal process-related reality.
Up to this point it is true that Bergson takes a firm stand in favour of a continuous view of temporal experience. At the same time, however, he gives a detailed and interesting analysis of our tendency to cope with our own durational experience in a way that introduces discrete forms of access to time and to temporal processes. For him, it is the context of acting that demands to “cut” the temporal continuity into fixed objects of differentiated states, situated at instantaneous points of time. Bergson compares the tendency to access temporal phenomena in this way with the mechanism of a film camera, taking instantaneous pictures out of the continuous progression of events to be filmed.
In his view, such a fragmentation of temporal processes does not only happen in the context of our analytical reflection but already in the context of our perception. After all we can say that this discrete way of approaching temporal processing is a basic and very natural part of our experience as well. So even if Bergson takes the continuity of time for more fundamental, he sees both our continuous experience of time and our discrete way of grasping it as related parts in the bigger context of our being incorporated in temporal processuality.
After reconstructing Bergson’s approach, I will consider its possible implications for the contemporary analytic debates about time, and show that it might open new perspectives on the reasoning about experience and ontology of time. For instance, concerning the issue of temporal passage, Bergson might help to bridge the gap between certain contrary intuitions of experience and ontology.