\brief{Ernest Nagel an Rudolf Carnap, 5. Jänner 1935}{Jänner 1935}

%American Express Co., Karntnerring 14.

%January 5, 1935.

\anrede{Dear Professor and Mrs. Carnap,}

\haupttext{I just received a reply to the letter I sent to Professor Coss\IN{\coss}. I am enclosing it for you to read, and ask you to be
good enough to return it to me. (I keep no duplicates of the letters I send, but preserve those sent to me.) I regret
that the prospects of your being invited to Columbia\II{\columbiauniversity} are so dim. I shall hope that Kemp Smith will decline, and that
nobody else but you will be available.

I also wrote to my friend, Professor Sidney Hook\IN{\hook} of New York University\II{\newyorkuniversity}, about the possibility of your coming to the
U.S. for a lecture tour. Of course, I imposed a pledge of secrecy upon him. He also replied, and writes as follows:
``Tell Carnap that Universities throughout the U.S. becoming politically more reactionary daily and to exclude from his
prospectus anything which some dumb conservative -- who ``feel'' these things -- might regard as cultural Bolshevism. I
wish I could get him to NYU\II{\newyorkuniversity} for a year, but it doesn't seem possible now and we couldn't pay him enough (at the outside
\$2000 out of which he would have to pay all travelling expenses.)''. In the light of these remarks, perhaps it would be
wiser if you replaced the lecture on the relation between contemporary philosophy and culture by something less full of
dynamite.

Thank you very much for the reprint\IC{} and the pictures. Apparently the snap-shots taken of Mrs. Carnap\IN{\ina} in the open air
were not a success, but I am very pleased with those you did send. As for the picture of me and by being overshadowed by
Professor Carnap\IN{\carnap}, it so true to life that I am delighted with it. But I cannot repress the sorry reflection that while
there is a heavenly nimbus in the background it is a ``stiff-necked'' Jew who occupies the stage.

I attended one meeting of the Wiener Kreis\II{\schlickzirkel}. Schlick\IN{\schlick} translated from Lewis'\IN{\lewis} paper\IW{} and he and the others disposed of the
examples of meaningful but allegedly unverifiable propositions. Schlick\IN{\schlick} remarked referring to the ``Notes for a reply to
Lewis\IN{\lewis}'' which you sent him, that `Carnap\IN{\carnap} hat sich getroffen gefühlt' on the score of some of Lewis'\IN{\lewis} criticism of the
positivists. He implied, so I understood him, that he himself never held any of the positions which you thought necessary
to disavow. I must say that if that is the case I never understood Schlick's\IN{\schlick} position, for I distinctly recollect his
maintaining what seems to me a mistaken form of logical atomism. My own impression of the meeting is that, with the
exception of Menger\IN{\menger} and Kaufmann\IN{\kaufmannfelix}, it had the air of congregation with the members singing in chorus with Schlick\IN{\schlick}.
I had the distinct sense that you were very conspicuous by your absence -- an impression which Kaufmann\IN{\kaufmannfelix} later verified.
At the next meeting, I think on the 10th, Schlick\IN{\schlick} will read from the unpublished manuscripts\IW{} of Wittgenstein\IN{\wittgenstein}. Everybody
must promise to make proper acknowledgements if he should publish anything on the basis of what he hears. I expect to go,
and hope to write you about what goes on.

I have been reading the books\IW{\quinebuch} \IW{\popperldf} of Quine\IN{\quine} and Popper\IN{\popper}. The former interested me only mildly though I recognize it as a solid
contribution. I do not quite see, however, how one is to reconcile his view that propositions are what sentences denote
with what he says elsewhere, e.\,g. about the identity of propositions. Popper's\IN{\popper} book\IW{\popperldf} is very \neueseite{} stimulating, especially his
criticism of conventionalism and the discussion of probability. I still think, however, that it may be possible to assign
a frequency interpretation to ``probability of theories'', although I confess I do not know how to do it in detail. I met
him once, and had an interesting discussion. Er ist mir ein sehr sympathischer Mensch -- full of himself and like most
Jews full of his own troubles, but likeable nonetheless. I have the impression that his brusque criticism of you and
other positivists is largely a matter of terminology, and wonder whether you are of the same opinion.

I have run into some difficulties myself concerning my marriage. I discovered that both in Italy and France a six months
residence requirement is necessary before the ceremony is performed, and have cabled home to find out whether less
rigorous requirements obtain in some other European country. The trouble is that if Edith\IN{\nagelfrau} comes and we cannot get married
very shortly, hotels may not admit us as a pair, and the expense of having to take separate rooms would be too much for
us. So at present I am impatiently awaiting advice from home, and meanwhile when and where Edith\IN{\nagelfrau} will come is still
in the lap of the gods.

I send you both my cordial greetings and warm esteem.}

\grussformel{Sincerely,\\
Ernest Nagel}

\ebericht{Brief, msl., 2 Seiten, \href{https://doi.org/10.48666/807884}{RC 029-05-16}; Briefkopf: msl. \original{American Express Co., Karntnerring 14. \,/\, January\,5, 1935}.}
