Letter to Kazimierz Twardowski written 22.10.1921

Author Roman Ingarden

Category outgoing correspondence, Polish researchers

Archive Joined Libraries WFiS UW, IFiS PAN and PTF

Date of creation 22.10.1921

Related places Freiburg, Toruń

Reference code in archive PTF Rps 02.1, t. XII

Resource type letter

Subject matter academic issues, organizational issues, personal issues

Field Bergsonism, philosophy

Tags #1916, #1917, #academic work, #apology, #Bergson's theory, #bergsonism, #copy of the paper on Bergson, #criticism of Bergson, #dissertation, #doctoral dissertation, #doctorate, #Edmund Husserl, #Freiburg, #Henri Bergson, #Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz, #Kazimierz Twardowski, #Kazio, #nostrification of a doctorate, #offprints, #paper on Bergson, #Perception du changement, #philosophical department at Freiburg, #publisher, #publishing situation, #Roman Ingarden, #Toruń

Toruń 22/10/1921

Most Honourable Professor!

A few days ago, I finally received several offprints of my paper on Bergson, one copy of which I am taking the liberty of sending to you, with a request to accept it. Unfortunately, I received such a negligible number of offprints that, in the case of many people to whom I had wanted to send copies, I’m unable to do so. I also wanted to send a copy to Kaziu Ajdukiewicz; however, when I calculated the number of people to whom I have to send offprints, it turned out that for Ajdukiewicz, just as for many other people very close to me, there wouldn’t be enough. I’m very sorry about this, but this was explained for me (or rather not for me, but for the publisher who didn’t want to put more copies at my disposal) in terms of the extraordinary publishing situation. If you’d be so good as to take the opportunity to apologise for this to Kaziu on my behalf, I’d be very grateful. – Anyway, this paper is a student essay on an assigned topic, and even though I gave it all I had in order to write it as well as possible, today, from the perspective of 4‒5 years later (it was written mainly in autumn 1916, the last chapter in spring 1917), it seems to me very childish at many points. However, I can say even today – as I confirmed recently while reading a printed copy – that this paper, in its essential points ‒ as to the presentation of Bergson’s theory and to the criticism thereof – is not incorrect. Besides, there’s one more critical part which I haven’t published yet, because, firstly, it wasn’t part of the dissertation, and second, it seemed rather immature to me. Whereas the new edition was begun last year, I’m not writing any more at the moment, because it turns out that first it’d be necessary to see to other issues, on the settlement of which my ultimate position with respect to the issues raised by Bergson depends. I’m currently working on these issues, and only when I finish them will I return – to the extent that it’s still possible at all – to the last part of the paper on Bergsonism.

As for the nostrification of my doctorate, I wrote to the dean of the philosophical dept. at Freiburg with a request to send me the relevant credentials, but even though a month has passed since then, I haven’t received a reply. Over the next few days, I’m going to write to Prof. Husserl, asking him to push the matter forward.

Because I’m afraid that a parcel with the copy of Perception du changement [Bergson, Perception of Change] would get lost in the post, I’m taking the liberty of asking you if you’d be so gracious as to send this copy, as I requested in my last letter.

I enclose expressions of profound esteem

Roman Ingarden