Finally nailed it!

Thanks Kyle. For sure, there's no doubt in my mind either that Deleuze absolutely respected Bergson. I see Bergson as a metaphysician through and through. I think there is a definite arc to his thought from _Time and Freewill_ to _Creative Evolution_ which is a progression from the individual to the Whole. This is kind of a movement from the phenomenological to the metaphysical, so we see in _TF_ a lot more of what we would readily recognise as 'phenomenological' descriptions of "psychic states," however, the goal I think was always to understand duration, not as a description of how time is immediately given in experience, but with a view to providing a metaphysical explanation for it (and thereby explaining mind/memory at the same time). A good example that shows the difference between what Bergson was up to as a metaphysician and what Husserl was doing as a phenomenologist, I think, is to look at the way they both treat perception; the former as an act that is literally 'out there' in the object perceived, the latter as a structure of consciousness _intending_ a transcendental object.

@@absurdbeing2219 Thanks. Yeah. That makes a lot of sense. Deleuze and Bergson are going in different “directions” it seems then. Bergson moving towards the whole while Deleuze is moving to the “molecular.” Very cool. Thanks for the explanation.

@dd2342 Deleuze call extension what Berson calls space, and duration could be related to difference. So they are both making metaphisics, I think. Then extension will be the "molar" and intension "the molecular"?