Now we have to send you seasonal greetings – the time goes on, and we with it. Very sorry, that you, Carnap are not so well off. I heard of Nagel’sPNagel, Ernest, 1901–1985, am. Philosoph, verh. mit Edith Nagel pain, but I did not imagine that your pain is also intense. I had the impression of a more superficial but nevertheless irritating thing. Poor boy, the whole time in bed. I hope the doctors will find out and fight your trouble, please, tell us, what will happen with you.
We are going on very well. We had to move, but got a new furnished house round the corner on the same hill, more adapted to our wants than the first one, which has been very nice indeed. We have now a nice studio in our house, where our collaborators work, a very nice team of British people. Now we are co-operating for 1 1⁄2 year, no quarrel, no grumbling, no tension – a different atmosphere from the atmosphere on the continent. We like the British temper and habit very much. We are always healthy and cheerful, no bullying boss, no financial difficulties after our initial ones, which have been bridged by our kind friends – what a bargain, to have such good friends. It is so important not to be hampered just at the start.
Now we have our ISOTYPE INSTITUTE, MaryPNeurath, Marie, 1898–1986, geb. Reidemeister, auch Reidemeisterin, Mieze, MR, Mary, dt.-brit. Pädagogin und Sozialwiss., Schwester von Kurt Reidemeister, heiratete 1941 Otto Neurath and I are directors of studies and secretaries, (Home Secretary permitted that) and now we are going on, as once in May, we have a permanent scientific collaborator in London, who collects material for us in the libraries. Here we have, as I told you, first class libraries. Our own library is very fine, too. I got a lot of useful books, e. g. UeberwegPUeberweg, Friedrich, 1826–1871, dt. Philosoph HeinzePHeinze, Max, 1835–1909, dt. Philosoph‚ Encyclopedia Britannica etc. atlases etc. many books I wanted – I was furious that theseathis HitlerPHitler, Adolf, 1889–1945, öst.-dt. Politiker gangsters have my library now, but now I am rebuilding my own, in spite of these beasts. All what happens in Europe is like a dark cloud — what a world in which we are pleased by looking at the American fortresses in the sky, returning from Germany and France.
Oxford University Press, told me, she has no copies, Harvard would send me a copy, please be kind enough and ask Harvard, whether they did send me a REGISTERED copy. I should like to answer some of your remarks after reading your book. Sure I want to get volume 2, too. Sooner or later I am reading everything in my library “Auf die Postille gebückt in der Nähe des wärmenden Ofens”. Sure, I shall collect the copies I have twice and give you back yours. It was a great help for me to get them. I feel really at home, surrounded by books, my own articles and pamphlets. I bought reprints on the market …What a time.
Oh sure I know a lot about artificial languages.🕮{}You see, I first met VOLAPÜK, a language like other languages, too, only “neutral”. That was my impression, and I did not devote any further interest to it – then I met PEANOPPeano, Giuseppe, 1858–1932, ital. Mathematiker, Latina sine flexione, which interested me because I was interested in Peano’sPPeano, Giuseppe, 1858–1932, ital. Mathematiker axiomatization of mathematics and in his attempt to write a mathematical deduction in symbols only. The use of Latin has something in it, but the Latin tradition is vanishing more and more and why this way? I think Peano’sPPeano, Giuseppe, 1858–1932, ital. Mathematiker ideas did not long bother me. Again and again Iba met ESPERANTO, and later on IDO, as a language it is a relatively complicated product with all the whimsicalities of relations between adjective and noun, etc. I do not speak of the nonsense with the letters and accents not found in our composers’ drawers, Ido did abolish this nonsense, of which – people told me – business and monopoly have been responsible. But Interlingua and Ido are more or less like other languages, you have many “idiomatic” elements in them, which are superfluous from a language point of view, as a tool of communication. It is difficult to get a sufficient number of books, written and printed in this language. ESPERANTO is successful – but very narrow in real usage. Poor people. We discussed with some of these people, who were related to the publishing centre the publication of ISOTYPE charts or books with Esperanto text, they confessed, that their means are far away from such possibility – what a situation. That wants to be an international body. We found out, that it looks more like a hobby of many people, but without important effect. IF it were an international tool – why not, but no scientist is prepared to publish his books in Esperanto, he prefers English or French. Now the Esperanto centre in Germany is closed and in other countries Esperanto is weak, in spite of the fact that even chambers of commerce etc. are supporting it.
You see in the English speaking world, English is the auxiliary language also for foreigners, the various aliens here, all the foreign governments use English, it is astonishing how the whole business runs in this way, English is manifestly now the Lingua Franca for very many people. Who will learn Esperanto in the USA? For what purpose?
Therefore BASIC ENGLISH has a great advantage, for READING and LISTENING; you see, it is very difficult to WRITE and SPEAK Basic, more difficult than trivial English. Why? You see, the goal is to speak CORRECT English by means of about 900 words, that means, to find out the IDIOMATIC WHIMSICALITIES which just allow to use these words only. Instead of a simple trivial English phrase you have to find out a complicated Basic phrase. The Advantage is the VOCABULARY simplicity, most 🕮{}important for reader and listener. Therefore the best thing for wireless. If I know only one of the 900 words will appear, I can guess what word was just said, otherwise the choice between dozens of words remains. The vocabulary is important for East Asia, for newspapers there, and periodicals. Important BASIC is a bridge to normal English. It is used to a wide extent.
Therefore I think that Basic for reading and listening as I often explained has a particular chance. I see no serious objection to its usage for printing books and giving wireless talks, from tomorrow, if necessary – no particular organization is needed, no time devoted to that is wasted.
The other International Languages are “isolated” and not attractive as far as their vocabulary is in question. Why should one learn all these queer and odd terms, for nothing and nothing, when you have no hope to meet another Esperanto hobbyist, the chance to meet some mencman who understand Pidgin English is much greater. Therefore, I like some Pidgin English, BASIC or another one, it should be simpler in grammar and without idiomatic stuff … In INTERGLOSSA, you see, as I told you, all roots are useful and normal ones. Whatever you learn in Interglossa it will be a part of the normal international terminology in science in any case. Some terms are rare, but why should I not learn rare scientific terms, which may be useful another day.
Writing INTERGLOSSA is the simplest thing you can imagine, international roots, USED IN SCIENCE, and Chinese Grammar, or Chinese lack of grammar, no relations between adjective and noun and all this stuff. For scientific writing really a bargain. Perhaps for other writing, too. Learning interglossa, implies learning something on language making and language technique, whereas learning Esperanto is learning a new language, which is a little simpler …
That is that –
What do you think of that?
I see not much positive value of Russell’sPRussell, Bertrand, 1872–1970, brit. Philosoph book, because it does not lead anybody to scientific thinking, but, on the contrary, to unscientific epistemology of oldest style, behind AvenariusPAvenarius, Richard, 1843–1896, dt.-schweiz. Philosoph. You see DuhemPDuhem, Pierre, 1861–1916, fr. Physiker und Philosoph, remains the type of books‚ useful for scientific arguing, not RussellPRussell, Bertrand, 1872–1970, brit. Philosoph. He has his great merits, but not just here.
I again read PopperPPopper, Karl Raimund, 1902–1994, öst.-brit. Philosoph, verh. mit Josefine Popper. I hope that after so many years you will see, how empty all that stuff is. Just the points in which we are interested from point of view of scientific arguing, are NOT ACCEPTED BY HIM, just there he is full of statements on experimentum crucis, negation of all sentences etc. what a decrease after DuhemPDuhem, Pierre, 1861–1916, fr. Physiker und Philosoph, MachPMach, Ernst, 1838–1916, öst. Physiker und Philosoph, etc. No feeling for scientific research. I am sorry that you have no time to give me NOW a short analysis of Popper’sPPopper, Karl Raimund, 1902–1994, öst.-brit. Philosoph, verh. mit Josefine Popper book, telling 🕮{}me, where the merits are. This queer idea that one can refute a hypothesis cannot even be used in a weaker way. You know, that I think even your formulation on degrees of testing pro and contra are transgressing empiricism. Perhaps that is the reason, why you feel a little for PopperPPopper, Karl Raimund, 1902–1994, öst.-brit. Philosoph, verh. mit Josefine Popper.
Of Tarski’sPTarski, Alfred, 1901–1983, poln.-am. Mathematiker und Logiker metaphysics I do no longer say anything. It is trivial sad AristotlePAristoteles, 384–322 v. d. Z., gr. Philosoph redivivus, nothing more. THAT DOES NOT EVEN TOUCH HIS FINE ACCOUNTING BUSINESS. But you see, what does help TarskiPTarski, Alfred, 1901–1983, poln.-am. Mathematiker und Logiker, when somebody proposes, to use statements in principle as statements OF SOMEBODY, and therefore always combined with some “accepted”. You may say, there are other possibilities, too; then I would like to see, how TarskiPTarski, Alfred, 1901–1983, poln.-am. Mathematiker und Logiker would be able to tell a story of throughout relativistic scepticism, without any ABSOLUTE relation “true”, but only relations between changeable statements. I suggest not to use a statement THE SNOW IS WHITE, but only as an abbreviation or a part of the sentence: WE ACCEPT THE STATEMENT THE SNOW IS WHITE. I accept the statement there are NAME PLATES thatdOriginal which. fit to SNOW, others thateOriginal other which. fit to ICE or WATER, why not, but even that is accepted by somebody, there are no STATEMENTS IN THEMSELVESfOriginal ITSELF.…I cannot see your point, perhaps in your Semantics you will tell of that.
That does not touch the calculus, the question is only where and when and how we may relate this calculus to scientific analysis. That I want to see. TARSKIPTarski, Alfred, 1901–1983, poln.-am. Mathematiker und Logiker tells about snow and white, I should like to see, how he analyses meteorological analysis or biological analysis, or mechanics or something like that fruitful. PopperPPopper, Karl Raimund, 1902–1994, öst.-brit. Philosoph, verh. mit Josefine Popper and TarskiPTarski, Alfred, 1901–1983, poln.-am. Mathematiker und Logiker should not be mentioned in the same breath, because TarskiPTarski, Alfred, 1901–1983, poln.-am. Mathematiker und Logiker is making things INDEPENDENT of the application, whereas PopperPPopper, Karl Raimund, 1902–1994, öst.-brit. Philosoph, verh. mit Josefine Popper only speaks of applications of something trivial, which seems to me inapplicablegunapplicable, therefore when we do not accept the whims of refutation of universal statements, nothing remains of importance. It was some idea, combined with anti-Vienna-circle resentment. Why not? It makes him breathing more cheerfully. So on.
You see, I test all these ideas by looking into the sciences, I am now reading carefully Maxwell’sPMaxwell, James, 1831–1879, brit. Physiker letters, speeches etc. and I found fine things, I am looking, how Lord KelvinPKelvin, William Thomson, 1824–1907, brit. Physiker argued, FaradayPFaraday, Michael, 1791–1867 brit. Physiker, MarxPMarx, Karl, 1818–1883, dt.-brit. Philosoph und Nationalökonom, Max WeberPWeber, Max, 1864–1920, dt. Soziologe, verh. mit Marianne Weber, and then I try to find out, where we could sharpen our doubts. And I see more and more, that the important point is to find out, where we expect stable relations or instabilities, “chance” etc. I am really sorry that ZilselPZilsel, Edgar, 1891–1944, öst.-am. Philosoph und Soziologe, HempelPHempel, Carl Gustav, 1905–1997, dt.-am. Philosoph, verh. mit Eva Hempel etc. talk of social sciences sometimes, but do not analyse these points. Usually you find the remark that group events are better predictable than individual events – THAT IS WRONG. It depends, what happens, there are stabilities in groups sometimes, but also instabilities …🕮
In my Empirische Soziologie, page 130. And, it is puzzling, many people wrote on my book, there appeared reviews, nobody neither one of our friends, nor one of our critics, did even mention this very, very important point, the NON-PREDICTABILITY of some social phenomena, related to INTERNAL SPEECH, as it were, is usually not even touched. Yes people, who have nothing to do with Logical Empiricism and with scientifichOriginal anticientific. attitude, are against all predictions etc., but “our people” do concentrate oniin prediction and do not even mention the problem of non-predictability. I shall put it forward in my monograph with some energy. I do not speak of the trivial Marxists who know all things, and speak only of ERROR afterwards …what a lot of lawyers … About your “true” I shall discuss with you after reading your book.
Oh yes, I read SURVEY GRAPHIC regularly, I get it as a friend of this periodical, FORTUNE and TIME I bought, whenever I see a copy, I have a collection of it, relatively seldom I see LOOK, Life is very popular here.
You see, analyzing various countries, creeds, etc. I think people who have the conviction they are right, even in the statement they are in error, or they are sinners, are very dangerous. Only planning together with scepticism and multiplicity will be nice. This implies, what the traditional German calls inefficiency, because he does not ask efficient in what. Planning for what? Output of autos? Or what? I speak of PLANNING FOR HAPPINESS, FOR FREEDOM, perhaps the “output” in machinery is smaller, but in freedom and happiness greater, what then? THIS PROBLEM IS NOT ANALYZED USUALLY BY PEOPLE INTERESTED IN PLANNING, mostly propagated by people who are against planning. That is a pity. A fine muddling through is a pleasant thing, and you may learn a lot of that here. I like the British for that. There is a nice booklet with pictures MUDDLING THROUGH. By BENSONPBenson, Theodora, 1906–1968, engl. Schriftstellerin, ASKWITHPAskwith, Betty, 1909–1995, brit. Schriftstellerin and BENTLEYPBentley, Nicolas Clerihew, 1907–1978, brit. Schriftsteller und IllustratorjBENTHEY, much fun in it. “THE AIM OF ENGLISH INEFFICIENCY IS THAT THINGS SHOULD GET DONE WITHOUT ANYONE SEEMING TO CARE.” You see, we do not know, how traditions are related to one another and to our happiness, therefore going away from some tradition perhaps reduces our happiness – there are certain points, where the matter is simple, and the things done far away from our personal life, for instance, organizing coffee production and distribution, without burning a third of the crop is a planning matter, not dealing with the worker’s tradition in Brazil and, I hope so, not with my coffee on the table. Why should not planning coal production be combined with old coal mining tradition and fire places wasting coal – the point is, that we do not destroy coal, not even used for our pleasure in wasting 🕮{}something. To produce less coal, because we like some singing and sprowling, means perhaps increase of happiness, but the rotting of coal in the docks does not help anybody, not even having more idleness or wasted coal in his fireplace.
Please, try to find out, what is with Candida KranoldPKranold, Candida, dt. Physikerin, Tochter von Sophie und Hermann Kranold, I did not get any answer, too. I hope nothing happened to her. Try to send a registered letter or a telegram, that is the way to find out officially what may be wrong.
I do not know Trude’sPMorris, Trude, verh. mit Charles W. Morris opinion officially, therefore I wait how she will react. I have not the slightest idea how CharlesPMorris, Charles W., 1901–1979, am. Philosoph, verh. mit Trude Morris and TrudePMorris, Trude, verh. mit Charles W. Morris have been together or not together, for me they are two separate individuals, one a more dreamlike phenomenon for me, related to some vague images along the road or in a room around a table, and some voice in the air, sometimes with a timbre I like and some irony, I like, and some broken German I like, and some habits I like – that is not much, but sufficient to want to remain in touch with somebody, called TrudePMorris, Trude, verh. mit Charles W. Morris in this case. I always try to continue nice contacts – that is that. CharlesPMorris, Charles W., 1901–1979, am. Philosoph, verh. mit Trude Morris is a separate personality, I do not know muchkOriginal much know. of his tricks and tracks, I know him as a faithful and correct person as far as I am concerned. I highly estimate his correctness in our collaboration and I like his serious side of his life, as far as I know it – I have not the slightest ideas of his “private life” or “non-life” whatever it may be. Since his Paths of Life I should not be astonished if he did found a new religion or something like that or become a painter, or an explorer – why not? The Human soul (as SchnitzlerPSchnitzler, Arthur, 1862–1931, öst. Schriftsteller says) is a wide realm‚ and many various mansions may be there. Why should I not like him, and like CarnapsPCarnap, Ina (eig. Elisabeth Maria immacul[ata] Ignatia), 1904–1964, geb. Stöger, heiratete 1933 Rudolf Carnap, and FranksPFrank, Philipp, 1884–1966, öst.-am. Physiker und Philosoph, verh. mit Hania Frank, Bruder von Josef FrankPFrank, Hania, 1894–1967, geb. Gerson, verh. mit Philipp Frank, each separately and sometimes together, HempelsPHempel, Carl Gustav, 1905–1997, dt.-am. Philosoph, verh. mit Eva HempelPHempel, Eva, 1908–1944, geb. Ahrends, verh. mit Carl Gustav Hempel, why not EvaPHempel, Eva, 1908–1944, geb. Ahrends, verh. mit Carl Gustav Hempel being in Capstadt as a lonely nun in a MAITREYAN camp, and HempelPHempel, Carl Gustav, 1905–1997, dt.-am. Philosoph, verh. mit Eva Hempel as a lonely bachelor in HaitilHaity, devoted to DIONYSIAN worship of some kind, MAITREYAN LIFE, DIONYSIAN LIFE …And all these MAITREYANS and DIONYSIANS may be regarded as members of a great family connected with CharlesPMorris, Charles W., 1901–1979, am. Philosoph, verh. mit Trude Morris, why not?…There are funny things in the world, I met somebody who told me of ghosts, he met just the day before, and others told me of a devil – why not? Some know something of THE truth, others of ERRORS, some make ISOTYPES and others Bauhaus, a strange world, …why not? That is life. I must confess that I do not see any person’s position properly, nevertheless I like some people and others not, some like much others like, others I dislike. I like e. g. Susan StebbingPStebbing, Susan, 1885–1943, brit. Philosophin very much, I do not think I judge her position properly, I infer that from the experience, that I sometimes afterwards learn something about her I did not imagine before, but I liked her before and afterwards. Why should I not like TrudePMorris, Trude, verh. mit Charles W. Morris without knowing her position? You see even if the position were awkwardmackwayd, 🕮{}why not? We have friends, and we know their defects – just that is perhaps friendship, to like somebody in spite of his defects we know. That is that. If TrudePMorris, Trude, verh. mit Charles W. Morris has strange whimsicalities dealing with other people, why not, I knew people who could not transgress open places and others got skin trouble after eating strawberries, AndersenPAndersen, Hans Christian, 1805–1875, dän. Schriftsteller tells of a man who could not look at a parson. And TrudePMorris, Trude, verh. mit Charles W. Morris cannot correspond with Charles’PMorris, Charles W., 1901–1979, am. Philosoph, verh. mit Trude Morris acquaintances. Such is life – that is all. But, now wait and see.
I do not know whether you know people with Nazi sympathies, where we did not expect it – I had in mind some younger people, you know hardly. You did see perhaps sometimes NeubacherPNeubacher, Hermann, 1893–1960, öst. Politiker, but one knew of this fellow that he had whimsicalities of national flavor. We despised the German Nationalism from the start, but some of these fellows without sensitiveness in their fingers spoke in grand style of national unity etc. not believing, that this kind of arguing in Germany was mostly related to sad things, including coarse antisemitism, plunder and robbery …
Why you are out of touch with the FranksPFrank, Philipp, 1884–1966, öst.-am. Physiker und Philosoph, verh. mit Hania Frank, Bruder von Josef FrankPFrank, Hania, 1894–1967, geb. Gerson, verh. mit Philipp Frank? Terrible Grelling’sPGrelling, Kurt, 1886–1942, dt. Philosoph fate. He waited too long. He explained me he would go to the USA, if there were some post for him etc. Many people thought so – unfortunately. I know cases in which people – antinazi aryans – returned to Germany, disliking the situation abroad as an alien without background. It is right, you have to start from scratch, but why not? I myself take a pride, perhaps a foolish pride as other things, not to go away, if not immediately forced to do it by some gangsters etc. I did not want to leave Holland and I did not want to leave England as some friends suggested. Perhaps you feel a little like a soldier – against HitlerPHitler, Adolf, 1889–1945, öst.-dt. Politiker and this plague. I like to be with the British in these hard days. Being in a new environment is rather thrilling and stimulating – I feel like a second youth here. On our life boat I thought of the future activity here. Perhaps others say we should go away sooner. Many did not like my return from the USA to Holland Autumn 1939, in war time …Therefore I shall look at GrellingPGrelling, Kurt, 1886–1942, dt. Philosoph from this point of view. Sad, very sad. What was the reason thatnthe Washington did not give visa in time?
WaismannPWaismann, Friedrich, 1896–1959, öst.-brit. Philosoph, verh. mit Hermine Waismann is teaching here in some college. I have seen him another day, but there is no real contact, his address: 104 Abingdon Road, Oxford.oHsl. Einschub.🕮
PaulPNeurath, Paul, 1911–2001, öst.-am. Soziologe, Sohn von Anna Schapire-Neurath (1877–1911) und Otto Neurath got a Columbia fellowship and is now assistant to the professor of statistics – that is OK. Fine. After all his trouble now some real success – he is not behind his years now. He is preparing his doctor thesis and hopes to finish this job, before he enters in some service, USA army business.
With kind regards from both of us to both of you
