Letter from Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz written 26.04.1935

Author Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz

Category incoming correspondence, Polish researchers

Archive Ingarden Family archives

Date of creation 26.04.1935

Related places Zakopane

Reference code in archive ARI

Resource type letter

Subject matter academic issues, portrait issue

Field phenomenology, philosophy

Tags #brochure, #Das literarische Kunstwerk, #entities, #formal ontology, #general object, #idea of the object, #intentionalism, #logic, #metaphysics, #moments, #painting, #phenomenology, #physicialism, #populäre Monadenlehre, #portrait, #psychologism, #real existence, #realistic monadism, #Roman Ingarden, #Stanisław Ignacy Witkiewicz, #Tadeusz Kotarbiński, #Witkacy, #Zakopane

26.IV.1935

Honoured and Dear Professor = Thank you for the letter that made me very happy indeed. Unfortunately, I have a bad period (and good, because it gives me freedom) of slight portrait overwork, and I am correcting my s[o] g[enannte] “populäre Monadenlehre”, as well as I am on the eve of leaving for “guest performances”, on top of that my personal life is v[ery] complicated and I’ve had 2 visits to Zakopane. Unfortunately, I still do not have the brochure – Id. Real. – some bad luck plagues it. Has it got lost maybe [?]. In “L.K.” I am on page 173. I cannot read faster, because I cannot limit myself to just reading this – it would excite me too much. I already have some notes for that other thing. In both of these things your own opinion breaks through – even explicite – that the general formal ontology is not enough – it is only the first purging of the field, and that it all depends on what kind of metaphysical content (essentially) will fit into these certain forms. And I am talking about those places where the Professor begins to stuff his forms, protecting them from leading us astray. And that’s where the fight begins. What you say about of a single act has motivated me immensely – because that’s what I mean, too – but you did not authorise me to send my manuscript on this subject, so I’m holding back. I struggle 1) with a general object, 2) with logic, which enters (through it too) into ontology, 3) with intentionalism, 4) with the act. In addition, with pure psychologism, physicalism, etc. What comes to mind is realistic monadism. “I accept the concept” = it’s impossible not to accept it, because its subject exists.

For me, ontology is always a description of the real existence, not the idea of the object in general. Multiplicity = to some extent closed whole = (IEs)* – only they are for me seinselbständig, because the objects exist only for them, although as their concepts they are independent, in themselves = (IEs). This is not about moments, but about separate entities that contain moments. I cannot write in letters. I must write more extensively about you, Professor, like I have done about Kotarbinski. I have not started reading Aufbau d.G. yet. Meanwhile, I enclose the words of deepest respect, affection and gratitude

Witkacy

So far my plan is as follows = from 1.VII = Zakopane until autumn.

I am concerned about the fate of the brochure I was so happy about!!

*(IPN)= Individual Existences; N means plurality, hence the abbreviation IEs