Published September 12th 2013.
Me: Good afternoon Mr. Bergson.
Bergson: Good afternoon.
Me: I’ve always been fascinated by your concept of “time”.
Me: Yes. I believe you call it “duration”.
Bergson: The concept of time isn't what everybody understands in their day to day life. For me it should be considered as “space”.
Me: As in a space-time continuum? By reading Mr Foyle’s book it seems that your concept of time is something like that. Is there a fundamental difference between “time” and “space” or are they interchangeable?
Bergson: The properties of “space” and “time” are different. What is the same are the properties of “space” and “duration”. Our common concept of time isn't accurate to apprehend the experience of time, hence the need for another concept and word. "Time", as we understand it, is a mix of the concept of space and the experience of time. As such it’s not a good concept, because it’s not accurate enough. "Duration", as I see it, is the concept of time purged from the concept of space, i.e., from what we think is time but in reality is only space.
Me: Does it mean that the “past” works as a “present” that is really not “present” anymore? How can we interpret the concept of “future”?
Bergson: The “future” is a “present” that is yet to materialize.
Me: Are you saying that future stuff only exists on the realm of possibilities that are waiting to exist? Is that it?
The rest of this "enlightened" dialogue can be found elsewhere.