Key Concepts in Bergson’s Matter and Memory: Essential Guide

If you’ve ever wondered about the key concepts in Bergson’s Matter and Memory, this guide distills them quickly without dumbing them down. Henri Bergson’s 1896 classic reframes mind and matter through the daring claim that reality is a field of images and that perception is not a camera but a pragmatic, action-oriented filter.

The payoff is large: you get a model of consciousness that explains how perception, action, and memory interlock in real time. This is not armchair metaphysics. It anticipates embodied cognition and modern debates about the brain’s role in choice, inhibition, and habit.

Below you’ll find a rapid summary, clear explanations of Bergson’s image ontology, his two modes of memory, the celebrated cone of memory, and why the body sits at the center of it all. By the end, you’ll see how these ideas form a coherent, still-relevant framework for understanding attention, habit, and the living present.

For context on Bergson’s life and works, see Wikipedia: Henri Bergson and the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Here’s the book in a nutshell—ideal for review or first contact with Bergson’s central claims.

• Reality as images: The world is a field of interacting images; the body is one image among others.
• Perception as selection: We don’t mirror the world; we select what matters for possible action.
• Two memories: Pure memory (the virtual past) and habit memory (automated sensorimotor know‑how) cooperate.
• Cone of memory: A diagram of how the past layers and descends into the present act.
• Brain’s role: The brain is an organ of inhibition, routing, and choice, not a warehouse of images.
• Practical upshot: Consciousness scales with need for choice—more alternatives, more awareness.

For a brisk reference to the text itself, see Wikipedia: Matter and Memory.

When Bergson writes that the world is made of images, he does not mean private mental pictures. He means anything that acts and is acted upon—a reality accessible from within and without. An image is the intersection of possible actions and effects, not a ghostly copy.

This move breaks a stale binary: either hard external matter or soft inner ideas. For Bergson, there’s a single, dynamic field where bodies and things relate as images among images. Your body is special not because it’s separate, but because it is a privileged relay of actions in that field.

Consequences follow. Perception becomes a mode of selection within the image field; memory is how the past weighs on that selection; the brain is a routing hub within the web of images. This dissolves naïve representationalism without drifting into idealism.

For background on these debates, see SEP: The Problem of Perception and Wikipedia: Philosophy of Mind. Understanding this ontology is crucial for grasping the key concepts in Bergson’s Matter and Memory.

Perception, for Bergson, is not a passive inner movie. It is an action-oriented filter that suppresses most of the image field, letting through what fits our practical readiness. We see what we can use, dodge, grasp, or reply to.

This explains why the same scene feels different under different aims. The chef’s kitchen and a tourist’s kitchen are visually the same, yet perceived differently because available actions differ. Perception aligns with sensorimotor possibilities, not neutral representation.

This anticipates contemporary enactivist and affordance-based views: meaning arises in the coupling of organism and environment. Bergson calls this selective pressure “attention to life” — attention tuned to survival, skill, and ongoing projects.

• Key insight: More possible actions = richer perception.
• Corollary: Habit narrows perception; learning re-opens it.
• SEO note for learners: If you search “action-ready perception Bergson,” you’re tracking a core theme behind the key concepts in Bergson’s Matter and Memory.

Bergson distinguishes pure memory and habit memory. Pure memory is the virtual past in its intact detail—not yet bent to use, preserved as lived. Habit memory is embodied know‑how, the sedimented result of repetition: typing without thinking, biking effortlessly.

They are not duplicates. Pure memory supplies images of the past; habit memory supplies motor schemes. Yet they interact constantly. When a situation calls for fresh judgment, pure memory can descend to guide action; when efficiency is needed, habit memory automates to free attention.

Modern analogies exist—think of declarative vs procedural memory—but do not equate them. Bergson’s point is structural: one memory preserves the past as virtual, the other replays it as action.

• Use case: Remembering a phone number (pure memory) versus dialing it by muscle memory (habit).
• Interplay: When a number changes, pure memory updates the habit through attention and rehearsal.

Bergson visualizes memory with the famous cone. Imagine a cone whose base contains strata of the past (pure memory in depth). Its apex touches the plane of present action—your body here and now. Attention moves along the cone: from diffuse memory layers to sharp, actionable images.

In moments of swift routine, you stay near the apex: habit does the work. When a novel problem appears, attention travels up the cone to search the past, then descends with a fitting memory-image that can be incarnated in action.

• Step 1: A present cue selects a problem.
• Step 2: Attention rises into memory’s layers to retrieve relevant scenes.
• Step 3: The chosen memory descends, aligning with current perception.
• Step 4: Habit integrates the selection into a new or refined motor scheme.

This dynamic picture shows how the key concepts in Bergson’s Matter and Memory interlock: ontology (images), perception (selection), and memory (virtual past) converge at the point of action. For further discussion, see SEP on Bergson’s memory.

Why is the body—especially the brain—central here? Because for Bergson the brain is not a vault of stored images but an organ of selection. It routes sensory excitations, inhibits misleading impulses, and permits the choice that marks genuine consciousness.

Lesions reduce available actions and narrow perception, not by erasing the past in itself, but by breaking the channels that activate and apply it. Consciousness expands with the number of real alternatives the organism can consider—hence why complex organisms exhibit richer awareness.

This view resonates with ideas about inhibitory control and action selection (e.g., basal ganglia circuits) in contemporary neuroscience, while keeping a philosophical warning: do not conflate storage with access. The brain’s job is to let the right memory descend and act at the right time.

• Not storage, but steering: The brain steers attention and action in the image field.
• Practical metric: More pathways available = more scope for decision.

Put the pieces together and you get a living system. Images form the world’s fabric; perception selects what matters; memory supplies depth; the brain gates and routes; and action is where they crystallize. Each concept reinforces the others.

Why it still matters: this framework explains why attention is scarce, why habits both free and blind us, and why learning changes what we literally perceive. It underwrites today’s interest in embodied cognition, ecological psychology, and skill-based design.

If you’re exploring the key concepts in Bergson’s Matter and Memory for research, UX, or AI ethics, the lesson is the same: intelligence is not just representation but timely selection for action. That insight remains surprisingly modern.

For a compact historical overview, see Encyclopaedia Britannica: Henri Bergson.

• What does “image” mean here? Not a picture in the head. It means any existent that acts and is acted upon in the world. Your body is an image among images.
• Is the cone of memory a literal structure? No. It’s a diagram of how attention travels from the virtual past to present action. Think of it as a conceptual model, not anatomy.
• Does Bergson deny that the brain stores memory? He reframes it: the past is preserved in itself (pure memory), while the brain accesses, selects, and applies it. This opposes the idea of the brain as a simple warehouse.
• Is this idealism or materialism? Neither. Bergson’s field of images avoids the split: reality is actionable and shared, while perception is a pragmatic cut through it.
• How do pure and habit memory interact? Pure memory offers detailed past scenes; habit memory translates selections into efficient motor patterns. Under pressure, habit leads; under novelty, pure memory guides.
• Where can I see the cone drawn? Many resources illustrate it; start with Wikipedia’s overview. For deeper context, consult the Stanford Encyclopedia.
• What’s the link to enactivism? Both reject passive representation. Perception is enacted by an organism poised for action. Compare Enactivism and affordances.
• Any practical reading tip? Map chapters to the schema: images → perception → memory → brain/action. Sketch the cone and annotate it with your own examples (cooking, driving, coding).

If you need a precise list of the key concepts in Bergson’s Matter and Memory for study notes, focus on: images, selection, pure memory, habit memory, cone of memory, inhibition, action. Mastering these terms unlocks the rest.