|
Abstract
|
Among the contemporaries of Bergson, not only the nationalist right, conservative opponent of the parliamentary system but also the left unparliamentary, revolutionary or anarchistic each showed their support for the exciting Bergsonism elan vital. Is it an alternative <>, that is to say <>? Behind this interpretation of ">, we see him, there is that of Bergson's theory of language. When he contrasts the abstract symbolic metaphorical attraction, the "income > to < productive indefinitely," Bergson analyzes the issue in terms of economic. However, Georges Sorel - it is too often regarded as a thinker of violence and as a deformation of Bergson - between the strength of its rating policy is economic union violence, so he sees a conflict between the language of intellectual and analytical intuitive language image. Bergson and Sorel saw the same horizon. If the language of violence in Sorel moved DAPS the sphere of economic anarchy which opens at the same time has the logic of capital and that of the anti-capital, the violence of language in just what Bergson might be called "> determining both the complementary economy of language: its mobility and stability.
Parmi les contemporains de Bergson, non seulement la droite nationaliste, conservatrice, adversaire du systeme parlementaire mais egalement la gauche antiparlementaire, revolutionnaire ou anarchisante manifesterent chacune leur faveur pour un bergsonisme exaltant l'elan vital. S'agit-il d'une alternative <>, c'esta-dire <>? Derriere cette interpretation du <>, le voit-on, il y a celle de la theorie bergsonienne du langage. Lorsqu'il oppose l'abstraction symbolique a l'attraction metaphorique, l'<> au <>, Bergson analyse la question du point de vue economique. Or, Georges Sorel - on le considere trop souvent comme penseur de la violence et comme deformateur de Bergson - oppose de son cote la force politique a la violence syndicale economique, de sorte qu'il y voit une opposition entre le langage intellectuel analytique et le langage intuitif image. Bergson et Sorel voyait le meme horizon. Si le langage de la violence chez Sorel se mouvait daps la sphere de l'anarchie economique qui s'ouvre a la fois a la logique du capital et a celle de l'anti-capital, la violence du langage chez Bergson vient de ce qu'on pourrait appeler <> determinant a la fois l'economie complementaire du langage: sa mobilite et sa fixite. |