Image Source

Bergson demonstrates that the concerning states are identified with our psychic angles and that scientific psychology commits this error by emulating different sciences and discussing inner states similarly as discussing extensive and quantitative things. The misstep of common sense is the exertion of utilizing the language of spatial things for non-spatial states. That is, both common sense and scientific psychology endeavor to decrease intensity to extensity.

We for the most part utilize numbers and quantitative words to portray and furthermore analyze the things saw in space. In any case, these sorts of quantitative relations can't be built up between psychic states. Intensity is influenced by the physical conditions, and the quantitative changes of these conditions cause adjustments in intensity, yet this modification is subjective.

While relating two things through their extensive extent, and furthermore while discussing two intensities, a similar articulation, for example, "greater than" might be utilized, however it isn't conceivable to utilize simply quantitative articulations, for example, "longer than" and "shorter than". As indicated by the expectation and reason, the first articulation can increase two distinct implications.

Image Source

One of these communicates a scientific size between the physical items and the other one communicates subjective contrasts in intensities. When we attest that one number is greater than another number or one body greater than another body, we know exceptionally well what we mean. For in the two cases we imply unequal spaces and we call that space the greater which contains the other.

A relationship can be built up amongst numbers and mathematically quantifiable things. In any case, between intensities there is no such connection. So our conceptualist illsuited language isn't equipped for communicating the deep-seated sensations. As indicated by Bergson, art enables us to go into the inner sensations through sensitivity.

Not at all like our normal and static language, the language of the art and the method for articulation it utilizes is extremely impossible to miss and dynamic. Bergson brings up the mix-up that both intellect and language makes by endeavoring to secure the consciousness through their own particular classes. The inclination of the intellect and language is to decipher the incomprehensible intensive things into quantifiable extensive things.

Bergson shows the perplexity of quality and quantity as the principle factor of the misunderstanding of the conscious states. To say of a less intensive sensation as contained in a more intensive sensation does not bode well. The connection amongst sensations and the modification of sensations can't be expected as in the connection amongst "contained" and "container", such connection must be built up between extensional things and spatial items.

Image Source

The other mixed up method for characterizing intensities is estimating their external causes and drawing a numerical parallelism amongst cause and effect, and amongst extensive and intensive. Bergson protects that we end up mindful of the love of an intensity without understanding its cause. Intensities are instantly experienced things without figuring the external causes.

Any enterprise that tries to catch intensity through the quantitative ideas or external causes can neither acknowledge nor clarify the change of intensities as deep-seated psychic phenomena. Because of the reason that the causes of the related intensities are absolutely subjective and not effectively quantifiable, they can't be clarified by previously mentioned techniques.

Regardless of whether the connection between a deep-seated intensity and external cause is close or not, clearly their fields of action are totally unique. The former is identified with the inner self and a conscious action, the last is identified with the mechanical movement and material things.

Image Source

References:
Common Sense
Common-sense Research: Senses, Emotions and Embodiment
Bergson and Perspectivism