An unlikely meeting that shaped history

Black and white photo of soldiers and damaged tanks under trees in a wartime setting. One soldier crouches in the foreground.

In 1917, France was on the brink of calamity. The great incinerator known as the Western Front consumed young men as voraciously as ever; supplies dwindled; mutinous unrest percolated in the ranks. Desperate for American intervention to tip the balance against the Central Powers, the French prime minister Aristide Briand pled for the US president Woodrow Wilson to commit his huge country to the war. But Wilson, messianic and haughty, bided his time.

Briand huddled with his ministers. They needed a new tactic, something unexpected. What if, someone bravely suggested, we send a philosopher to Washington, DC and see what he can do?

That philosopher was Henri Bergson, an extraordinarily popular thinker whose public lectures on time, memory, and the élan vital packed auditoriums with swooning fans: he appeared to imbue life with the creativity and mystery that science seemed to diminish. Passionately patriotic, he accepted the mission and took a liner to Washington.

Black and white photo of a man in a suit, Henri Bergson, sitting in a library with bookshelves and a desk filled with papers.

Henri Bergson in his study. Courtesy the BnF, Paris

Bergson was granted an audience with the president, whose self-love was most intense when it came to his own intellect. They talked for hours. Bergson played his cards well: he appealed to Wilson’s desire to strut the world stage as the bringer of peace, the founder of the League of Nations. They plumbed Bergson’s philosophy, which he said implied that the Germans were the enemies of civilisation. A few weeks later, the United States was at war.

I don’t want to give too much credit to Bergson – and I don’t think the US should have joined the war – though at least one Wilson adviser said that Bergson gave the president the push he needed. This little-known story of the philosopher and the president is remarkable: it is perhaps the most important diplomatic intervention by a philosopher, and a reminder, as if we needed it, of the extraordinary consequences of unlikely meetings.

by Sam Dresser

FIND OUT MORE

Well worth a read is the wonderful Aeon essay ‘Henri Bergson, Celebrity’ (2019) by Emily Herring on the philosopher’s immense popularity, particularly with women.

To read (a lot) more about the meeting between Bergson and Wilson, the paper ‘The Philosopher and the Rooster’ (2020) by Geert Somsen has everything you need.


NOTE TO SELFETHICS

How will the future judge us?

Listen to this article

Daguerreotype of a seated man wearing an apron and a partially open shirt framed in a gold mat.

If we’re honest with ourselves, most of us can probably think of something we are doing, or declining to do (or supporting, or buying into) that is likely to strike people of the future as an obvious example of a moral failure. Human choices are sometimes badly at odds with human ideals and, in many cases, that seems to become clearer to everyone in the rearview mirror.

I got a fresh reminder of this while recently watching the PBS documentary series The American Revolution (2025). If you know anything about that revolution, it’s hard to miss the disconnect between its lauded ideals – including the assertion, in the Declaration of Independence, that ‘all men are created equal’ – and the slavery upheld by many of the nation’s founders.

The documentary also highlights a less-known detail about the Declaration. In a draft of the colonies’ complaints against the British crown, Thomas Jefferson, himself an ‘owner’ of people, blamed the king for the Atlantic slave trade and, incongruously, called it a ‘cruel war against human nature itself’.

What’s stuck with me in particular is the way the historian Annette Gordon-Reed then sums up Jefferson’s relationship to slavery. ‘From the beginning to the end, this institution bounded his life, even though he knew it was wrong,’ she says. ‘How could you know something is wrong and still do it? Well, that is the human question for all of us.’

For me, her remark is an invitation to reflect. Hopefully, for most of us, our current behaviours don’t include anything that will be as terrible to our descendants as enslavement is to us. But the excuses we might give for acting or not acting now are likely to seem much thinner to someone living 250 years from now. And that, I think, casts a brighter light on our choices.

by Matt Huston

FIND OUT MORE

In her article ‘Whose Independence?’ (2025) for The Atlantic, Annette Gordon-Reed tells the story of African American writers who, going back to the revolutionary era, challenged their country to recognise the implications of its own stated ideals.

The Aeon Essay ‘Moral Progress Is Annoying’ (2024) by Daniel Kelly and Evan Westra explores why even positive changes in moral standards often cause irritation and dismissiveness at first.


NOTE TO SELFEMOTION REGULATION

Finding solace in Murderbot

Listen to this article

A person wearing a futuristic robotic suit walking through a lush green forest.

A science fiction fan in my teens, I recently decided to dip my toes in the genre again. When I asked Claude for recommendations, it suggested the Murderbot Diaries (2017-), a book series by Martha Wells, about a half-robot, half-human ‘construct’ with a rich emotional life (maybe Claude was dropping me a hint?)

Murderbot is designed to be a SecUnit for protecting humans on space missions. It manages to deactivate its ‘governor module’ granting it the ability to make free choices. If you’re interested in the limits and ethics of machine intelligence, you’ll find the series compelling. But that’s not its only appeal, especially if you’re someone with non-optimal levels of angst and self-consciousness.

The novellas are told through the inner monologue of Murderbot. Its wry, detached observations about its own emotional and social discomforts can be hilarious and surprisingly relatable. On occasion, I’ve found myself emulating its narrative style in my own head, and it can be an odd comfort.

For example, you know that panicky feeling when someone expects you to open up? Murderbot describes one such instance in Book 1, All Systems Red: ‘I had cycled out of horrified that they wanted to talk to me about my feelings into grateful that she had ordered them not to.’

Murderbot is effectively modelling how to notice your own inner thoughts and feelings from a distance – similar to how an ACT therapist might coach you in ‘defusion’ with prompts such as: ‘So, what’s your mind telling you now?’

There is an irony in a fictional form of machine intelligence helping us to feel more normal – more human – about our own insecurities. But as Jason Sheehan put it so well in a review for NPR: ‘we are all a little bit Murderbot.’

by Christian Jarrett

FIND OUT MORE

Read an interview with the Murderbot author Martha Wells at Scientific American, covering personhood, neurodiversity, and how contemporary forms of AI compare with those depicted in her books.

For a simple way to create psychological distance from your thoughts and feelings, try this simple linguistic trick that was explained in a Psyche Idea by the social psychologist Ariana Orvell.


How I became more facially expressive

Listen to this article

A man in a hoodie on a phone walking past a wall with posters and graffiti-covered advertisements.

For most of my life I was not, I don’t think, a very facially expressive person. I’m ethnically Korean, and we tend not to move our faces too much (partly because it’s just the norm, along with a shared cultural concern that it encourages wrinkles). Even when telling a dramatic story, big expressions never felt natural to me, the way they seemed to be for others, and I’d wonder whether the restraint on my face was limiting my ability to connect with people.

It’s not an absurd idea. Research from 2024 concluded that being facially expressive is socially advantageous, suggesting it might lead others to like you more and see you as more agreeable. Another study found that expressiveness predicted how attractive people seemed to others.

My relationship to facial expressiveness started to change about three years ago, when I started learning American Sign Language. ASL is a language of the body. Individual signs provide a vocabulary, but much of the grammar and descriptive nuance comes from how you move your body and face. Suddenly, my stiff and muted facial expressions became a fluency issue, getting in the way of my legibility as a signer.

Signing ‘I like’, for example, communicates something far different when you do it with bright eyes and strong movements compared with signing it with a shrug and noncommittal expression. I’ve learned to make these distinctions clear across my face.

Over time, I’ve noticed a difference – I am more expressive now with everyone, not just when I’m signing. This, in turn, has made me feel more outgoing in conversation. I have a hunch that people now perceive me as friendlier.

Sometimes, when I’m feeling tired or shy, I’ll notice myself under-expressing, slipping back into my old ways. In those moments I remind myself that showing your feelings on your face is rewarding, and a way to invite greater understanding.

by Hannah Seo

FIND OUT MORE

The Psyche Idea ‘Speaking a Different Language Can Change How You Act and Feel’ (2024) by Antonella Gismundi explores how changing from one spoken language to another can affect speakers’ sense of self.

I wrote more about learning ASL in The New York Times Magazine in the article ‘How Sign Language Can Help Us All Be Better Communicators’ (2025), describing how the physicality of this tactile language and its grammar butted up against the instinct for precise language.


NOTE TO SELFPOETRY

Existential crisis? Try reading Wordsworth

Listen to this article

Portrait painting of a man in a thoughtful pose with hand on head wearing a dark coat and white cravat against a dark background.

William Wordsworth was just a few years younger than I am now when he wrote the ageless poem ‘Ode on Intimations of Immortality’ (1807). He laments the falling away of his childhood as it departs ever further into memory:

It is not now as it hath been of yore;–
Turn wheresoe’er I may,
By night or day.
The things which I have seen I now can see no more.

I too sense a receding past, as childish certainties are replaced by rather harrowing questions: what am I doing here? Is this it? What does my life mean? As I become increasingly aware of the finitude of my days, my desire for answers grows more urgent.

These sorts of questions can induce a sense of existential imbalance, even crisis. Two great American philosophers, William James and John Dewey, had crises of just this sort when their sense of purpose seemed to evaporate. And they both navigated their angst in a similar way.

For James, an episode of intense crisis was alleviated by poetry, when he read of: ‘Authentic tidings of invisible things … subsisting at the heart / Of endless agitation.’ It gave him a sense, he wrote, of freedom. For Dewey, relief came in the form of a full-blown epiphany, which he later gamely tried to articulate: ‘everything that’s here is here, and you can just lie back on it’. The poet who aided both philosophers? Wordsworth.

So I read his masterpiece, The Prelude (1850). He too describes finding moments of poetic lucidity that unburdened him of a certain human painfulness. When he climbed Mount Snowdon, he recognised – in a flash – that an impersonal God speaks through nature, that love is the fount of all that’s worthy, and that suffering is necessary for true creativity: pertinent answers to pertinent questions. Though mine still remain.

by Sam Dresser

FIND OUT MORE

On the Romantic (though German) generation of poets and thinkers, you could hardly do better than this Aeon Essay by Andrea Wulf, ‘The First Romantics’ (2022).

William James has been fortunate enough to find a brilliant expositor in John Kaag. His Aeon Essay ‘The Greatest Use of Life’ (2018) is a classic.

Explore more

A man in European clothing and a man in a skullcap, loose robe and white beard gesticulate while a police officer stands in the background.

For Montaigne, verbal jousting is the only way to reach truth

In a disagreement, you must face your opponent: only by verbal jousting will you reach the truth, said Michel de Montaigne

by Rachel Ashcroft

Painting of a man in black clothing and cap writing in a book with a quill, set against a dark blue background.

The politician is the malformed monster of our coexistence

The French civil wars produced a novel type: the politician, represented as a monstrous amalgam of conflict and coexistence

by Emma Claussen

Photo of a person with curly hair viewing a large, square, framed blank canvas on a white wall in a gallery.

How to think for yourself

Schopenhauer and Proust can help you find inspiration from your favourite writers while also retaining an independent mind

by David Bather Woods

Photo of a masked officer talking to two seated people outside Les Deux Magots cafe in Paris.

In a pandemic we learn again what Sartre meant by being free

What the Nazi occupation was for Sartre, the COVID-19 pandemic is for us: an opportunity to relearn what it means to be free

by Julian Baggini

Black and white photo of two men in overalls standing before large industrial gears, each scratching his head.

Why Charlie Chaplin was an ‘angel of peace’ for Walter Benjamin

Though a tramp and a misfit, Chaplin’s world fit him like a glove. His life of contingency appealed to the émigré Benjamin

by Eli Friedlander

Photo of an elderly man with grey hair in front of a bookshelf filled with colourful books.

To Karl Jaspers, uncertainty is not to be overcome but understood

The existentialist Karl Jaspers believed uncertainty ungirds human existence: better to recognise this than rage against it

by Carmen Lea Dege

Ancient fresco depicts a seated figure holding a child, while another figure approaches, accompanied by a young child with wings, on a weathered background.

Can political persuasion be something more than manipulation?

Kant argued that persuasion was a product of manipulation and deception. But it can also be a force for good in civic life

by James Kastely

Photo of soldiers in camouflage sitting on a rocky terrain at dusk with a smoky horizon and distant lights in the background.
ETHICS

What luck in war reveals about the role of chance in life

From the battlefield to the playing field, don’t overlook the role of luck. It shapes how we judge others, and ourselves

by Andy Owen