Albert Einstein versus Philosophy On

The Nature of 🕒 Time

And Philosophy's Great Setback For Scientism

... image

On April 6, 1922, at a meeting of the French Society of Philosophy (Société française de philosophie) in Paris, Albert Einstein, fresh from the global fame for his Nobel Prize nomination, delivered a lecture on relativity in front of a gathering of prominent philosophers in which he declared that his new theory rendered philosophical speculation about the nature of 🕒 Time obsolete.

Einstein’s opening salvo was direct and dismissive. In response to a question about the philosophical implications of relativity, he declared:

Die Zeit der Philosophen ist vorbei (The time of the philosophers is over).

Einstein concluded his lecture with the following argument, sealing his dismissal of philosophy:

There remains only a psychological time that differs from the physicist's.

Einstein's dramatic dismissal of philosophy had a massive global impact due to his Nobel Prize nomination.

The event would become one of the most major events in the history of both science and philosophy and would mark the advent of the era of the decline of philosophy and the rise of scientism.

The Great Setback for Philosophy

Philosophy had seen a period of florishing most prominently represented by famous French philosopher Henri Bergson, who's life's work centered on the nature of 🕒 time and who sat in the audience of Einstein's lecture.

The multi-year long debate that ensued between Einstein and Bergson and that continued until their last messages shortly before their deaths, would cause what historians describe as the great setback for philosophy that would fuel the rise of scientism.

... evidence last messages shortly before passing: Einstein and Bergson still persuing their debate 20 years later, potentially revealing significance beyond the content of the debate
.. picture

Jimena Canales, professor of history at the University of Illinois, described the event as following:

The dialogue between the greatest philosopher and the greatest physicist of the 20th century was dutifully written down. It was a script fit for the theater. The meeting, and the words they uttered, would be discussed for the rest of the century.

In the years that followed the debate, ... the scientist's views on time came to dominate. ... For many, the philosopher's defeat represented a victory of rationality against intuition. ... Thus began the story of the setback for philosophy, ... then began the period when the relevance of philosophy declined in the face of the rising influence of science.

.. transcript + professor link ..

Corruption For Scientism

This historical investigation will reveal that Henri Bergson lost the debate on purpose as part of philosophy's centuries ongoing self-imposed enslavement to dogmatic scientism.

While Bergson was successful in having Einstein's Nobel Prize for relativity revoked, this action caused a massive backlash for philosophy that helped fuel the rise of scientism.

... picture

Bergson had become world famous in part through his work Creative Evolution in 1907 which provided a philosophical counter voice for Charles Darwin's evolution theory. A critical examination of this work reveals that Bergson was losing on purpose to cater to Darwinists, potentially explaining his popularity (chapter ).

Bergson's Loss And A Win For Science

Bergson was largely perceived to have lost the debate against Einstein and public sentiments had sided with Einstein. For many, Bergson's defeat represented a victory of scientific rationality against metaphysical intuition.

Einstein had won the debate by publicly pointing out that Bergson didn't understand the theory correctly. Einstein's win of the debate represented a win for science.

Bergson made obvious mistakes in his philosophical critique Duration and Simultaneity (1922) and philosophers today characterize Bergson's mistakes as a great embarassement for philosophy.

The book Duration and Simultaneity (1922) by Henri Bergson bundled with Albert Einstein's theory of relativity (1921) is published in 42 languages in our book collection. Download or read online here.

For example, philosopher William Lane Craig wrote in 2016:

The meteoric fall of Henri Bergson from the philosophical pantheon of the twentieth century was doubtless due in part to his misguided critique, or rather misunderstanding, of Albert Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity.

Bergson’s grasp of Einstein’s theory was simply embarrassingly wrong and tended to bring disrepute upon Bergson’s views on time.

.. link to website and source

In the aftermath of Bergson's defeat, some of Bergson's students would leave him for his apparent failure of intellect which reveals the profundity of his supposed intellectual error that would cause the great setback for philosophy.

... details

Obvious Mistakes And Einstein's Contradiction

While Einstein attacked Bergson in public about his failure to understand the theory, in private he simultaneously wrote that Bergson had fully and correctly understood the theory, which is a suspicious contradiction.

Professor of history Jimena Canales who published a book on the debate, characterized Einstein's contradicting behaviour as political.

Einstein's contradiction is a strong indication of corruption.

Confession By The Nobel Committee

... name

The chairman of the Nobel Committee confessed that an influence was at play that deviated from public sentiments and scientific consensus.

It will be no secret that the famous philosopher Bergson in Paris has challenged this theory.

Professor of history Jimena Canales, who wrote a book on the debate, observed the following:

The Nobel Committee's explanation that day surely reminded Einstein of [his dismissal of philosophy] in Paris that would spark a conflict with Bergson.

The Nobel Committee had no logical ground for rejecting Einstein's Nobel Prize for relativity.

The Nobel Committee had no institutional inclination to defend metaphysical philosophy or to defy public sentiments and scientific consensus, and it was the Committee that had nominated Einstein in the first place, therefore their decision negatively impacted their own organization's credibility.

In the aftermath, the Nobel Committee faced intense criticism from the scientific community.

Einstein's Response To The Nobel Committee

... picture

Instead of the Nobel Prize for relativity, Einstein received a Nobel Prize for his work on the photoelectric effect.

Einstein responded by lecturing on relativity at the Nobel ceremony, therewith dishonoring the Nobel Committee's decision and making a statement.

Einstein's dramatic action to lecture relativity during the ceremony for his Nobel Prize for the photoelectric effect played into the public sentiments of the time and caused a moral loss for philosophy that had an effect that went much beyond an intellectual loss.

Backlash For Philosophy

The revokation of Einstein's Nobel Prize for relativity for critique by famous philosopher Henri Bergson, while public opinion had sided with Einstein, fueled a moral justification for science to break free from philosophy.

Did Bergson fail to understand Einstein's theory of relativity?

This investigation will reveal that Einstein's private notes should be considered leading for a perspective on Bergson's actual understanding of the theory, despite his apparent obvious mistakes, which implies that Bergson lost on purpose for the supposed higher interests of science (Darwinism and correlated scientism), a feature that was already visible in his work Creative Evolution in 1907.

Philosopher Henri Bergson

... image

French philosophy professor Henri Bergson, a world famous philosopher and a titan of French intellectual life (member of the Académie française, Nobel laureate in Literature, 1927), was widely perceived as one of the most prominent philosophers in the history of philosophy.

The Most Dangerous Man In The World

The philosopher Jean Wahl once said that if one had to name the four great philosophers one could say: Socrates, Plato — taking them together — Descartes, Kant, and Bergson.

Philosopher William James described Bergson as an exquisite genius, perhaps the most so among the living.

The philosopher and historian of philosophy Étienne Gilson categorically claimed that the first third of the 20th century was the age of Bergson.

Professor of history Jimena Canales described Bergson as following:

Bergson was simultaneously considered the greatest thinker in the world and the most dangerous man in the world

(2016) This Philosopher Helped Ensure There Was No Nobel for Relativity Source: Nautil.us (PDF)

Bergson's life's work centered on la durée (Time as Duration) — a concept of time as lived, qualitative and ∞ infinite divisible.

For Bergson, time was not a series of discrete moments but a continuous ∞ infinite divisible flow intertwined with consciousness. Einstein's reduction of time to a coordinate in equations struck him as a profound misunderstanding of human experience.

At Einstein's lecture event, Bergson challenged Einstein directly:

What is Time for the physicist? A system of abstract, numerical instants. But for the philosopher, time is the very fabric of existence — the durée in which we live, remember, and anticipate.

Bergson argued that Einstein’s theory addressed only spatialized time, a derivative abstraction, while ignoring the temporal reality of lived experience. He accused Einstein of conflating measurement with the thing measured — a philosophical error with existential consequences.

... book cover

In 1922, Bergson published Durée et Simultanéité (Duration and Simultaneity), a dense critique of Einstein's relativity. He conceded relativity’s mathematical coherence but rejected its claim to ontological truth. Bergson insisted that Einstein's time was merely a tool for coordinating events, not an account of 🕒 Time itself.

The book Duration and Simultaneity (1922) by Henri Bergson bundled with Albert Einstein's theory of relativity (1921) is published in 42 languages in our book collection. Download or read online here.

Bergson's Effort To Revoke Einstein's Nobel Prize

In the years following the debate, Bergson actively used his influence through hidden networks of prestige, which had given him the title most dangerous man in the world, to pursue the Nobel Committee to reject Einstein's Nobel Prize for relativity.

Bergson was successful and his efforts culminated in a personal triumph handed out by the chairman of the Nobel Committee, who confessed the following as ground for rejecting Einstein's Nobel Prize for relativity:

It will be no secret that the famous philosopher Bergson in Paris has challenged this theory.

(2016) This Philosopher Helped Ensure There Was No Nobel for Relativity Source: Nautil.us (PDF)

The Committee's use of the term famous and the reference of Paris reveals that they were elevating Bergson's personal influence and standing as a justification for their decision.

Losing On Purpose

Did Bergson fail to understand Einstein's theory of relativity?

The author of this investigation is a long time defender of free will since 2006 through the Dutch critical blog Zielenknijper.com. He started a study of Henri Bergson in 2024 shortly after his study of philosopher William James.

The author read Bergson unbiased and was in the assumption that Bergson would provide strong logic for the defense of free will. His first impression however, after reading Bergson's Creative Evolution (1907), was that Bergson was losing on purpose.

Creative Evolution Versus Darwin's Evolution Theory

... image darwin

Bergson's book Creative Evolution played into the public interest at the time for a philosophical counter voice for Charles Darwin's evolution theory.

The author's first impression was that Bergson intended to cater to both readers: admirers of Darwin's evolution theory (scientists more generally) and believers in 🦋 free will. As a result, the defense of free will was weak and in some cases the author recognized a clear intent to lose on purpose.

Bergson apparently attempted to give Darwinists an underbelly feeling early on in the book, that they would come out as winners on the end of the book, by making an obvious contradiction in his logical arguments that fundamentally undermined his own reasoning.

The author's first idea was that Bergson was attempting to secure the success of his book from a general public perspective that had come to favor Charles Darwin's evolution theory, explaining in part why Bergson had become world famous in a world dominated by the rise of science.

... citations / examples

Bergson's Global Fame

Bergson's global fame might have been caused in part by American philosopher William James as a thank you for what otherwise might be considered a minor intellectual contribution, when considered by itself, that helped James resolve a major philosophical dispute and impassee that hindered his own philosophy.

William James was enstrangled in a long-standing dispute between the rationalist and empiricist schools of philosophy. Bergson's philosophy provided James with the conceptual tools to break free from his philosophical impasse.

In the early 20th century, when Bergson's work was not yet widely known outside of France, James played a crucial role in introducing Bergson's ideas to the English-speaking world.

Through his writings and lectures, James helped to popularize Bergson's ideas and brought them to the attention of a wider audience. Bergson's reputation and influence grew rapidly in the years following James's championing of his ideas.

The Rise Of Science

Bergson's rise to world fame coincided with the rise of science and the popularity of the evolution theory of Charles Darwin.

By writing a philosophical counter voice for Darwin's evolution theory early in his career, Bergson had positioned himself at the forefront of the emancipation-of-science from philosophy movement of which philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wrote the following in his book Beyond Good and Evil (Chapter 6 – We Scholars) in 1886:

The declaration of independence of the scientific man, his emancipation from philosophy, is one of the subtler after-effects of democratic organization and disorganization: the self- glorification and self-conceitedness of the learned man is now everywhere in full bloom, and in its best springtime – which does not mean to imply that in this case self-praise smells sweet. Here also the instinct of the populace cries, “Freedom from all masters!” and after science has, with the happiest results, resisted theology, whose “hand-maid” it had been too long, it now proposes in its wantonness and indiscretion to lay down laws for philosophy, and in its turn to play the “master” – what am I saying! to play the PHILOSOPHER on its own account.

Science aspired to become the master of itself and to break free from philosophy.

Philosophy's Self-Enslavement To Scientism

From the works of Descartes, Kant, and Husserl to the contemporary era with Henri Bergson, a recurring theme emerges: the self-imposed attempt to enslave philosophy to scientism.

For example, Emmanuel Kant's apodictical certainty concept, which is knowledge that is necessarily true and cannot be doubted and more specifically concerns the belief in the realness (non-disputableness) of space and time, is dogmatically adopted and fundamentally underlays his whole philosophy.

Kant's concept of apodictic certainty goes beyond just a strong claim and is a claim of absolute, indubitable truth, which is akin to religious dogma. Kant scholars write the following about Kant's account of reason that fundamentally underlays the concept:

We might note that Kant never discussed reason as such. This leaves a difficult interpretative task: just what is Kant’s general and positive account of reason?

The first thing to note is Kant’s bold claim that reason is the arbiter of truth in all judgments—empirical as well as metaphysical. Unfortunately, he barely develops this thought, and the issue has attracted surprisingly little attention in the literature.

Kant's Reason Source: plato.stanford.edu

Similar to religions, by neglecting to address the fundamental nature of reason, Kant abused the fundamental mystery of existence for an absolute truth claim and that provides evidence of intent to establish dogmatic scientism when viewed in light of the purpose clearly communicated at the start of Kant's philosophical project: the grounding of science with indubitable certainty.

The same abuse of the mystery of existence is seen in René Descartes famous claim cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am) that similar to Kant's apodictical certainty seeks to establish indubitable truth.

In the work of pillar of philosophy Edmund Husserl, the aspiration to ground science with certainty is set forward from the start and Husserl even profoundly deviates from his past philosophy, described by some scholars as betrayal, in a later attempt to serve that primary purpose: the grounding of science, which in practice means to enable science to depart from philosophy through dogma.

Bergson's Promotion To Pillar Of Philosophy

Bergson's strategic ability to lose on purpose for the advancement of scientism and his positioning at the forefront of the emancipation-of-science from philosophy movement through his work Creative Evolution (1907) may have been the reason that Bergson was promoted to pillar of philosophy, rather than for his actual philosophical contributions.

Bergson received a Nobel prize for literature which involves the ability to strategically write, and not for philosophy.

A philosopher on the discussion forum I Love Philosophy asked the following questions that provides an insight in the situation:

Show me some examples of this most genius person alive at the time. Show me an example of this famous amazing supergenius philosophy of Bergson.

(2025) Einstein's Philosophy Source: I Love Philosophy Forum

These questions aspired to reveal: there is no evidence that would justify the idea that Bergson was the greatest philosopher of all time.

Corruption

Bergson's great embarassement for philosophy that would cause the great setback for philosophy in history is unlikely to have been an accident.

Einstein's contradicting behaviour in his private notes, revealed in chapter , is a strong indication of corruption.

The conclusion must be that Einstein's private notes should be considered leading for a perspective on Bergson's actual understanding of the theory, despite his embarrassing mistakes, which implies that Bergson lost on purpose for the supposed higher interests of science (Darwinism and correlated scientism), a feature that was already visible in his work Creative Evolution in 1907.