Charles Sanders Peirce took strong exception to those who associated him with Bergson. In response to a letter comparing their work, Peirce wrote, "a man who seeks to further science can hardly commit a greater sin than to use the terms of his science without anxious care to use them with strict accuracy; it is not very gratifying to my feelings to be classed along with a Bergson who seems to be doing his utmost to muddle all distinctions." Peirce also comments on Bergson in respect to a proposed book on his semiotics (which he never wrote) saying: "I feel confident the book would make a serious impression much deeper and surer than Bergson’s, which I find quite too vague." Gilles Deleuze, however, saw much in common between Bergson's philosophy and that of Peirce - exploring the many connections between them in ' and '. As the Deleuze scholar David Deamer writes: Deleuze sets about "aligning Bergson’s sensory-motor schema "Matter and Memory" with the semiosis of Charles Sanders Peirce from "Pragmatism and Pragmaticism" (1903). William James's students resisted the assimilation of his work to that of Bergson. See, for example, Horace Kallen's book on the subject "James and Bergson". As Jean Wahl described the "ultimate disagreement" between James and Bergson in his "System of Metaphysics": "for James, the consideration of action is necessary for the definition of truth, according to Bergson, action ... must be kept from our mind if we want to see the truth". Gide even went so far as to say that future historians will overestimate Bergson's influence on art and philosophy just because he was the self-appointed spokesman for "the spirit of the age".