Henri Bergson's "Material and Memory" has own very simply constant idea that our subjective mind tries to interact us with time's running and approach the materials around us in peerceptive mind.

And as he claims around his emphacizing subjective mind, he uses necessarily memory and it accidentally drags our mind into externally developped spatially dimensional coginition or cognitive mind toward world itself. 

However, essentially his claiming and emphacizing content could be intepreted as what our spatial cognition could depend on to so major extent physiological term's mind's cognition.
In other words, in time running, only his claimed our mind by itself tries to assimilate with externally developped everything as materially regarded everything, and in it, necessarily he claimed our subjective mind could exist.

That is so simply summarized his claim.

Nevertheless, his integrally emphacized contents could not include spatially extent reality dragging content in our mind as awareness around interaction between our body and mind as what mutually could be assimilated with each other and that "spece" by itself, in other words, toward the reality, Henri Bergson only emphacizes time's running and subjective mind, though he uses the memory around perceptive awareness.

However, in fact, to us, otherwise our mind itself, not only time's running attending our own memory and mind in interaction, but also spatially dragged kind of bodily tangible and sensing own extent intrigued sensitivity around our own sensed exetention and our bodily diffused passive sensing must exist in our sensing life, or perceptive life.

In other words, Henri Bergson must have interpreted all items only according to idealsim, that tendency is confirmed also at Edmund Husserl's ohenomenological interpretation.
Eventually, probably the same year given birth these two philosophiy giants could have gone through one world war and another one's symptom could be taken into their mind at the last period of their lives.(E.H.<1859-1938>, H.B.<1859-1941>)

Though, consequently they'd taken their stance only reliant on mind and its noticeable reacting function around time running and mind's precedence around any externally exciting thing in own reaction could have been regarded as notionally dragged memory or so.

But actually, in life of us, so many complicated dimensional own bodily physiological intervention must be obliged to be done to our own life, but that dimensional approach must be needed to wait for until the coming of 20century's last period. And really at those days, brain function's research and own academic experimental approach at mind philosophy and brain physiology, brain neuro science as nerve physiology and nerve economics as more psychologic approach in mutual cooperation.
By the way, consequently more recently appearing philosopher Paul Ricoeur(1913-2005) was providing our world more our bodily objective analysis not only idealism abiding stance but also so materialism abiding it could be taken to his approach.

At next chance to grapple with its theme, swtiching the inspectable object into Bertland Russele as his "Analysis of Mind", and at there why don't we make alalytical approach advanced and evolve by itself.

(to be continued)

Mar. 27th.     2022

Appendix; Husserl must have approached to physical nature of our body, but that must have been restricted in a range of totalized cognition as so-called "idealism" around one body unit dimension at my interpretation through taking part in several phenomenology academic circle as activity of philosophy as another participation in analytical philosophy.