الفلسفة الروحانية عند هنري برغسون

Abstract EN

The author attempts to tackle the spiritual philosophy of Henri Bergson which is understood to be a living, inner, instinctive sense that rightly expresses spiritual permanence as an ontological mode that tries to prove itself by means of the idea of perfection.

It links the ethical and the ontological, making the ethical conform to the spiritual-temporal, since permanence extends with the creative nature and call to live with spiritual values in lived reality for humanity to have a true essence that transcends instinct or reason and instrumentalism and rescues contemporary man from the claws of nihilism and objectification.

The problematic of the research lies in its attempt to answer the following questions: what is the status of permanence in the spiritual philosophy of Henri Bergson? Why did he concentrate on the spirit as opposed to the natural body? What is the source for Bergsonian spiritual values? How did Bergson refute modern conceptions based on instrumental reason and ob- ?jectification Neo-Kantians advocated the need «to return to Kant» in order to understand the times and raised the dilemma of what exactly was meant by this slogan and its implications for those who promoted it.

What does the return to Kant mean? Is there a single defined form of this return or did it take various and conflicting forms? In other words, how did the neo-Kantians interpret Kantian philosophy? Did they remain faithful to Kant or did they propose readings that differed from his thinking? Was their work limited to reclaiming and imitating his ideas literally or did they renew and expand the horizon? To address these challenges modern philosophers with a neo-Kantian outlook are here revisited, specifically Wilhelm Windelband and Heinrich Rickert of the Baden school, as well as Hermann Cohen, Paul Natorp, and Ernst Cassirer of the Marburg school.

The paper suggests that Kantian philosophy has been differently perceived, and that neo-Kantians were inspired by Kant’s philosophical method rather than his ideas as a whole.

Neo-Kantianism is not a school of faithful adepts or blind followers of Kantian texts.

On the contrary, it includes divergent readings and puts forward various interpretations of these texts.

The neo-Kantians have worked to interpret the philosophy of critique in different modes and critiqued and revised it in light of modern developments in science and philosophy.

This has allowed this philosophy to develop more and more, thus maintaining its openness and relevance.