This thesis is possible only on the condition that time is understood from the outset as now-time, on the basis of a particular context, namely, the constitution of space in simultaneity. Time is not space, any more than space is time. But time is simply the possibility wherein the being of space can be determined existentially-temporally—but not because the being of time is space, but because being in general, as the being of every being, must be conceived of in terms of time. Or at any rate, according to the state of our present philosophical possibilities, being can be singularly understood in terms of time. I do not want to be so entirely dogmatic as to say that being can be understand only in terms of time. It may well be that tomorrow someone will discover a new possibility. That is why we can never say that space or nature or any other being is time. Strictly speaking, we cannot even say “Being is time,” but only that “The being of this being bespeaks time.” Or more exactly still: “The human understanding of beings—and I emphasize human—is possible from out of time.” I stress “human” because in philosophy we really must stop confusing ourselves with the good God—unlike Hegel, for whom that confusion is a principle.

But as I said, Bergson does not limit himself to this thesis. Rather, confronted with this concept of time, which he identifies with space, he tries to make us understand that ur-time is duration—ur-time, which he also calls “real time” or “real duration.” Of course we get very little philosophical information out of him on this, because he says nothing about the meaning of “reality,” and tells us nothing about the ontological nature of the life or consciousness wherein he finds real or lived time.

According to Bergson, time is space and quantitative succession, and it is distinguished from duration, which is qualitative succession. The very phenomenon of time (now-time) is shifted from the category of quantity to that of quality. Bergson [268] thinks he has located the metaphysical essence of time (therefore, authentic time) in duration, and so he takes time in its usual sense to be space. But in so doing he shows that he has not understood time. If he had, he would have had