ABSTRACT
Becoming, in the interesting sense, is conceived of as analogous to growth. If upholders of 'becoming' are bound to take this substantialized view of the past, it will be a serious objection against the plausibility of 'becoming'. The unsatisfactoriness of the definition of time in terms of motion is not in anything that can be definitely controverted, but in its onesidedness, and in the stunted view of time to which it gives rise. To say that "time is a kind of number" is, from one point of view, true, but it is curiously insufficient. Time, in the sense of duration, is at the very heart of things. M. Bergson lays himself open to the criticisms that he had himself put forward in Time and Free Will against a too-spatialized conception of choice, which sullies the splendour of pure duree.
