> Anyway, thanks for this: I'm gonna give this some thought for when I write out a longer, more rigorous iteration. Feel free to email me if you ever want to talk about this intersection; it's pretty much what I do these days.

Absolutely, I'll ping you over email shortly. Although I find in person over libations to be much more dialectical (in the Socratic rather than Hegelian sense.) Maybe we'll cross paths at a conference some day...

> it's pretty much what I do these days.

A minor obsession we share, apparently, although it's been a while since I've been in full philosophical immersion mode.

I must admit I am woefully late to the Deluezian party. I've been reading around him for years (Heidegger, Husserl, a bit of Lacan, Marion, Levinas) but this discussion has pushed me over the edge, it's time I got up to speed -- where would you suggest I start?

As for Bergson, I see him as a kind of rival to the entire Husserlian tradition, Heidegger in particular; addressing the same questions regarding science and the difficulties of post-Kantian, post-Hegelian epistemology in the modern world, but much clearer and therefore less subject to the cult of interpretation that seems to be the domain of French phenomenology. It's all but forgotten that in say, 1920, had you had asked who was the most important philosopher in the world likely the answer would have been 'Bergson.' I think he still has a lot to say to us in 2013.

I'd start with his Introduction to Metaphysics and then to Matter and Memory.

Thanks for the exchange Steve, very fun stuff.