It is clear that intelligent acting involves deliberation. The almost
inevitable motor response to a stimulus, which is characteristic of
the reflex or instinct, does not occur in the intelligent action:
instead of this we find that we choose between two or more responses
to the same stimulus. We reply to the latter by doing _this_ now,
and _that_ another time; and we see at once what results flow from
acting differently upon the same part of our environment, or acting in
the same way upon different parts. Perception, that is, knowledge of
the world, arises from acting; and as our actions, when carried out
intelligently, become almost infinitely varied, the environment appears
to us in very many aspects. In every action we modify that part of our
surroundings on which we operate. We can produce many modifications
that are of no use to us: these we do not attend to. We produce others
that are useful, and then we note the sequences of events involved in
our actions. Thus we discover or invent natural law--an environment
which is an orderly one. We can calculate and predict what will happen:
we produce, for instance, a _Nautical Almanac_, at once the type
of useful knowledge and of knowledge of sequences of events rigidly
determined--knowledge in short that is mechanistic; and which has been
engendered by the necessity for acting on our environment in our own
interests.
All this, the reader may note, is Bergson’s theory of intellectual
knowledge, a theory which, new and paradoxical at first, becomes more
and more convincing the longer we think about it, until at last it
seems so obvious that we wonder that it ever seemed new. Our modes of
thinking become constrained into certain grooves, just because these
modes of thinking have been those that were generated by our modes
of acting. So long as our thinking relates only to our acting, its
exercise is legitimate. But if its object is pure speculation its
results may be illusory, for a method has been applied to objects other
than those for which it was evolved. Let us now extend our intellectual
methods to the investigation of the organism. Necessarily we must
reason about the latter as a mechanism if we reason about it at all.
If it is a mechanism it must conform to the laws of energetics,
for science, so far as it is quantitative, whether its results are
expressed in the form of equations or inequalities, is based on these
principles.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account