\brief[Neurath an Carnap, Oxford, 28.~September 1945]%
{Otto Neurath an Rudolf Carnap, 28. September 1945}{September 1945}\labelcn{1945-09-28-Neurath-an-Carnap}


\anrede{My dear friend Carnap,}

\haupttext{
Good Ina\IN{\ina}\index{Carnap, Ina} told me, that my remarks very often put your meditation into motion and even touches your sleeping capacity. I learn from that, that a friend's remarks are taken seriously by you -- but please do not\fnA{Hsl. Einschub.} think that I behave differently. Your letters ask me to search my behaviour and life and to try to alter it. As I told you, well knowing the slight persecution mania very frequent in scholars, I try to fight any nucleus of such a behaviour in me.

Therefore I assumed, of course, that perhaps my remark, that Schlick\IN{\schlick}\index{Schlick, Moritz!humiliating Neurath} behaved in a humiliating way, could be overstated and that I should look at something he said, as a criticism and myself as too sensitive \ldots\ I tried to remember Schlick's\IN{\schlick}\index{Schlick, Moritz} behaviour in our talks -- Frank\IN{\frankphilipp}\index{Frank, Philipp} as witness -- his behaviour in the circle etc., and I could not discover any case in which I fought criticism, always cases in which I fought arrogance and an attitude humilitating me, but, as you know, we should be very careful, where we are witnesses about ourselves. But I remembered, that I have the French text of Schlick\IN{\schlick}\index{Schlick, Moritz!on unified science \ekl{Paris}}'s remarks on me. I ask you and Ina\IN{\ina}\index{Carnap, Ina}, whether you think this kind of talking has to be regarded as ``criticism proper''. I think criticism involves that giving ``names'' is not proper criticism, WHEN WITHOUT EXPLAINING THE REASON\index{Schlick, Moritz!on unified science \ekl{Paris}}. I think adding esthetical judgement is usually not just criticism -- it tells about the person's biography, not about the work in question. But please, look at the following quotations: (from our department in the IX\textsuperscript{th} International Congress of Philosophy, 1937, IV. L'ÉCOLE DE VIENNE ET LA PHILOSOPHIE TRADITIONELLE. ``Certains d'entre eux ont m\^{e}me une antipathie marquée contre le mot `philosophie' (as if it where some whim, not explained in detail) qu'ils veulent \neueseite\{\}\zzz proscrire au b\'{e}n\'{e}fice d'autres termes\fnA{\original{terms}} tels que `science unitaire', par o\`{u} ils entendent se consid\'{e}rer eux-m\^{e}mes, non comme des philosophes, mais comme des chercheurs scientifiques \ldots'' etc.\fnEE{Schlick, ,,L'école de Vienne et la philosophie traditionnelle``, 100. Eine englische Übersetzung dieses nicht mehr von Schlick autorisierten Textes ist enthalten in Schlick, \textit{Philosophical Papers}, vol. 2. Im deutschen Manuskript Schlicks lautet die Stelle (,,Metaphysiker und Dogmatiker``, 478): \glqq Einige von ihnen haben sogar eine Antipathie gegen dieses Wort, wollen es durch andre Termini wie z.\,B. \glq Einheitswissenschaft\grq\ ersetzen und sich selbst als wissenschaftliche Forscher angesehen wissen.\grqq}

And then:

``Ce que l'homme fait par peur produit presque toujours un effet ridicule (please, look into my writings, whether I am using such terms, even when objecting other people's opinions). Ce n'est donc pas étonnant si tel anti-métaphy\ekl{si}cien propose par exemple\fnA{\original{example}}, le plus s\'{e}rieusement du monde, d'\'{e}tablir un Index verborum prohibitorum, o\`{u} il faudrait dénoncer tous les mots qui se trouvaient le plus souvent au centre des discussions m\'{e}taphysiques, par exemple `monde', `\^{a}me', `\^{e}tre', etc. et le mot `philosophie'\ lui-m\^{e}me, dont nous avons d\'{e}j\`{a} parl\'{e}. C'est vraiment une dr\^{o}le d'id\'{e}e (Do you think this is a word of scholarly criticism? I should take even that, if combined with real analysis and criticism. I started this language business as a student, considerably influenced by Itelson\IN{\itelson}\index{Itelson, Gregorius}, and my contact with you and other people is partly based on the fact, that we agree about certain main points. What a strange situation, that Schlick\IN{\schlick}\index{Schlick, Moritz!on unified science \ekl{Paris}} fights for the ``soul'' \ldots\ oh my dear. But I should not mind his OBJECTIONS, if he did mention at least one, but he only tries, without telling my name -- NICHT GENANNT SOLL ER WERDEN --, to make me a laughing-stock. Some crazy crank -- that is all) que de vouloir conduire les hommes \`{a} la v\'{e}rit\'{e} en leur faisant peur de certains mots. Etc.'' And then the estheticist has the word, fortunately in vain, because the translator dropped ``Einheitswissenschaft''~=~``Einheizwissenschaft'' ``\ldots{} le remplaçant\fnA{Original \original{replacement}.} par des expressions sans couleur et peu esth\'{e}tiques telles que `science unitaire'. Cette attitude me paraît reposer sur un profond malentendu.''\fnEE{Schlick, \glqq L'école de Vienne et la philosophie traditionnelle\grqq, 101, 104. Die (nicht ganz genau) entsprechenden Stellen in Schlick, \glqq Metaphysiker und Dogmatiker\grqq, lauten: \glqq Was der Mensch aus Angst tut, wirkt fast immer lächerlich, und so dürfen wir uns nicht wundern, wenn ein solcher Antimetaphysiker z.\,B. den komischen Vorschlag macht (allen Ernstes), einen Index verborum prohibitorum aufzustellen, auf den Worte zu setzen wären, die oft im Mittelpunkte metaphysischer Fragen gestanden haben, also z.\,B. \glq Welt\grq, \glq Seele\grq, \glq Wesen\grq\ etc., ja das Wort \glq Philosophie\grq\ selbst, das durch minder \glq gefährliche\grq\ zu ersetzen sei [...] wahrlich eine groteske Idee!\grqq\ (474f.) \glqq Die Menschen dadurch zur Einsicht bringen zu wollen, dass man ihnen vor gewissen Wörtern Angst macht [...]\grqq\ (474) \glqq [...] und manchmal gehen sie so weit (wie schon bemerkt), das Wort \glq Philosophie\grq\ als Name für ihr eigenes Bemühen abzulehnen, um es durch farblose und unschöne Ausdrücke wie etwa \glq Einheitswissenschaft\grq\ zu ersetzen. Diese Einstellung scheint mir auf einem tiefen Missverständnis zu beruhen.\grqq\ (479)} JUST ``malentendu'' -- HE DIXIT \ldots{} Boy, boy, rereading this I believe in Otto Neurath\inneurath{} in \neueseite\{\}\zzz the witness box, when telling that SCHLICK\IN{\schlick}\index{Schlick, Moritz!humiliating Neurath} liked to humiliate Otto Neurath\inneurath{}, not even thinking him as sufficiently equal that one has to explain the objections; the grand spirit gives names -- how simple. And I cannot see, that you or Feigl\IN{\feigl}\index{Feigl, Herbert} or any other of Schlick\index{Schlick, Moritz}'s\IN{\schlick} friends ever tried to give me a kind of satisfaction, by mentioning, that Schlick\IN{\schlick}\index{Schlick, Moritz!on unified science \ekl{Paris}}'s way of criticism does not give sufficient credit to Neurath's\inneurath{} hard work, -- acceptable or unacceptable, that is another question -- who tried for about 40 and more years to alter his own language carefully, thinking seriously of this matter and explaining again and again, why dropping ``soul'' etc. Not because it is his whim, explaining in detail, why what we are striving for is an EINHEITSWISSENSCHAFT, -- perhaps with some unacceptable details, about which we may start discussion. But how can you discuss with libel-like remarks without reasons?

You see, this very often presses me in a position to tell of my own work, because others sometimes go too far -- as far as I can see -- in deteriorating my whole work and sometimes humiliating me. I am for peaceful contacts, BUT I AM NOT PREPARED TO SWALLOW HUMILIATION. Really not. But I am wholly prepared to learn, that what I think an unproper behaviour of other people is just the usual thing. Question: DO YOU THINK THAT THIS WAY OF SCHLICK\IN{\schlick}\index{Schlick, Moritz!on unified science \ekl{Paris}} TO TELL INTERNATIONAL READERS ABOUT MY POSITION WITHIN OUR MOVEMENT SHOULD BE CALLED PROPER?\fnAmargin{Ksl. \original{\textsp{\uline{Schlicks Formulierungen} in dem französischen Vortrag sind in 1 oder 2 stellen nicht ganz guter Geschmack; aber Dein Urteil über sie scheint mir sehr übertrieben. In üblichen philosophischen Diskussionen gibt es eine große Zahl von viel schlimmeren Verstößen.}}.}

I know DE MORTUIS NIL NISI BENE\fnEE{Latein: ,,Sag nichts als Gutes von den Toten.``} -- but that seems to be only valid, when writing necrologies\fnA{\original{necrologs}} \ldots{} And another quotation (from Goethe\IN{\goethe}\index{Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von}) Man sagt Eigenlob stinkt, was aber ungerechter Tadel für einen Geruch hat, darnach fragen die Leute nicht (I quote from memory).\fnEE{Goethe, \textit{Maximen und Reflexionen}, 523: ,,Man sagt: ,Eitles Eigenlob stinket.` Das mag sein; was aber fremder und ungerechter Tadel für einen Geruch habe, dafür hat das Publikum keine Nase.``}

That is that. I am looking forward to a very kind, very nice, very illuminating couple of letters from both of you,
}
\grussformel{ever yours\doned{\\\editor{Otto Neurath}}}

\hspace{2cm}\includegraphicscn[width=2cm]{Grafiken/Elefant-17.png}{}

\grafik{Platzhalter Grafik: Elephant}

\ebericht{Brief, msl., 3 Seiten (kleines Format), \href{https://doi.org/10.48666/846799}{RC 102-55-12 (Dsl. ON 223)}; Briefkopf: gedr. \original{Otto Neurath, Dr. Phil.\,/\,Secretary, Isotype Institute}, gestempelt  \original{194 Divinity Road\,/\,Oxford}, \hbox{gedr.} und hsl. gestrichen \original{30 Dickerton Road\,/\,Headington, Oxford}, msl. \original{28\textsuperscript{th} Sept. 45}, ksl. \original{bekommen 12.10.}; statt schriftlicher Signatur grob skizzierte Zeichnung eines Tieres.}
