Bergson, "Creative Evolution," Chapter 1: The Evolution of Life - Early 20th Century

Bergson, "Creative Evolution," Chapter 1: The Evolution of Life - Early 20th Century

Let's see, Chapter 1 of Bergson's "Creative Evolution" is a discussion of the evolution of life, which cannot be explained by mechanism and the purpose argument. Heredity is the main topic here, and it is said that the evolution of life cannot be captured by the worldview and the purpose argument alone. Two points are made: one is that it cannot be fully described by mathematics, and the other is the limitations of the mathematics of the time. Furthermore, it is emphasized that the portable changes of organic materials are different from those of inorganic materials. Inorganic matter is fabricated, while organic matter is organicized. This difference is what is important when considering heredity and evolution.

Evolutionary theory will also be examined, and the four theories of Darwin, de Vries, Eimer, and Lamarck will be discussed. However, it is said that this issue should not be understood in the realm of mathematical formulas and logic, but rather as "the dynamism of life (non-additive infinity). When "Creative Evolution" was published in 1906, probability theory and algorithmic mechanistic explanations did not yet exist. Informational mathematics did not emerge until the 1930s, and one can only imagine what Bergson would have said if he had seen it.

First, Darwin's theory. It was thought that minute variations would accumulate through natural selection. However, it does not explain how the same structure can appear in different environments, even though the conditions for selection vary by habitat and time of year. The question remains, in Bergson's words, "Why do the same mutations accumulate in the same order? Harmony is behind, he suggests.

Then there is de Vries' mutation theory. This is the theory that one day a huge change occurs in an organism, and it is passed on to offspring. However, it does not explain how the coordination of the whole function is maintained when a huge change occurs. The mechanism by which partial changes naturally harmonize with the whole cannot be dismissed as coincidence.

Eimer's theory of directed evolution holds that the direction of evolution was determined because organisms were continuously affected by light. However, it does not explain how a primitive organism, which would have been exposed to the same light, could have developed a nervous system as sophisticated as that of humans. Light alone cannot explain how such a difference could have occurred under identical conditions.

Lamarck's theory holds that individual effort causes genetic changes. However, muscle training does not result in the acquisition of new functions. Since changes in the body do not affect the germ cells, effort in a shallow sense cannot cause evolution.

Thus none of the theories of Darwin, de Vries, Eimer, or Lamarck are conclusive. Neither the accumulation of chance, sudden changes, effort, nor external conditions can speak to the nature of evolution. Bergson argues that biological evolution should be understood as "the dynamic of life. It is a natural process for similar structures to appear in different species because they diverge from the same starting point.

The key is to view evolution as a continuous flow. If we cut out a part of that flow, we can see order and structure, but that is only the result. In reality, it is a simple dynamic that is passed on through branching to produce similar structures in different species. We cannot understand the essence of evolution by mathematically analyzing the order of a moment cut out of the flow. It should be told only as "the dynamism of life (non-additive infinity).

Thus, the core of Chapter 1 becomes clear. To depict evolution not as a static picture, but as the dynamism itself. Harmony is behind, and superficial order is always only a fragment of the process. Bergson's "creative evolution" opened up this perspective in the early 20th century.