From the Unconscious to the Conscious 



phantasmal edifice, of gorgeous tapestries hiding an 

 imperfect and defective structure whose foundations are 

 insecure. We lie under the magic spell and fear to 

 awake disillusioned. 



M. Gillouin 1 says: * M. Bergson carries us along 

 with him round and over all obstacles, with an ease 

 which makes us think of some high intellectual school 

 of thought.' Unfortunately it also makes us think of 

 skilful sleight of hand. . . . 



The want of preciseness in Bergsonian philosophy 

 makes it appear conformable, at least on a superficial 

 survey, to the most opposite doctrines. It would be 

 comical, were it not saddening, to see men who stand 

 for the most opposed ideas placing themselves under 

 M. Bergson's segis. Deists -and pantheists, orthodox 

 and theosophists, neo-occultists, and even it would seem 

 neo-syndicalists 2 all invoke his authority. 



As for the philosophers, they are simply disconcerted 

 by a system so pliable as, on the one hand, to allow of 

 the assertion that 3 * whatever may be the deepest essential 

 nature of things we are a part thereof (which seems 

 a profession of pantheist faith conformable to the general 

 spirit of Bergsonian metaphysics); and, on the other 

 hand, to affirm that the whole of this metaphysic 'presents 

 the idea of a God freely creating both matter and life, 

 whose creative work is continued by the evolution of 

 species and by the constitution of human personalities,' 

 and also, that ' this work is the categorical refutation of 

 both monism and pantheism! ' * 



6. DOCTRINES CONTRARY TO WELL-ESTABLISHED FACTS 



One of M. Bergson's principal doctrines is that the 

 distinction between the animals and man is one of 

 nature, not of degree. 



1 Gillouin : La Philosophic de M. Bergson. * Idem. 



8 Revue de Metaphysique et de Morale, Nov. 1911. 

 * Etudes, 2oth Feb., 1917. 



180 



