Letter to the Committee of the Library of Classics of Philosophy written 03.12.1964

Prof. Roman Ingarden      v                         v             v             v    Krakow, 12/3/1954
Head of the department
of German philosophy
Krakow, Biskupia 14 apt. 15



    v To the Editorial Committee of the LCP
    v           v           v           v     In Warsaw, Krakowskie Przedmieście St. 79


I respectfully report the following:

  1. Two days ago I sent I. Dąmbska, PhD, the corrections for to the first volume of Leibniz Nouveaux Essais /349 galley proofs, Book I and II/. I am continuing to work on the rest of the revision. However, since it is aimed both at detecting some remaining flaws in the translation, and at the same time proposing a new better wording for a number of places, I cannot devote more time of the day to this task, as after two hours I lose sensitivity to the properties of the translation and start reading mechanically. As a result, work on the corrections to the 2nd volume will take some more time (I suppose about 10 days). Therefore, I suggest that the Editorial Committee send volume I to the printing house for the time being, and the second volume only around mid-December, when Ms. Dąmbska is has been able to accept or reject my suggestions. I regret very much that I did not receive the first revision, maybe this matter could be settled earlier.
  2. I am simultaneously working on the “Introduction” to Leibniz by prof. Kołakowski. The text raises many reservations as to the historical fidelity of the statements made by the author. Consequently, when reading one has to carry out many inspections, not only by looking at the history of philosophy, but also the original texts. It takes a lot of work and progresses slowly. As, at the same time, I have the impression that my opinion will not have much practical significance anyway, I am asking the Presidium of the Editorial Committee to release me from this task. If, however, the Committee still wishes for me to express my opinion, the process will have to continue for a while, especially since I would have to express the reservations I have in writing.
  3. Having thought over the entire issue of “Erscheinung” in Kant’s “Critique of Pure Reason” and after obtaining an opinion from prof. Tatarkiewicz, who was absent at the last meeting of the Committee in Warsaw, I came to believe that the translation should go back to using the old terminology /”Phenomenon”/, and at the same time the Terminological Supplement should thoroughly discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both proposed terms, and cite arguments that appeared for each of them in the course of discussions at Committee meetings. To this end, I am kindly asking you to:

    v     a / to replace in the final typescript my translation of the word by “manifestation” with the word “phenomenon”, in all cases where the former term appears,

    v     b / to supply a footnote /where the word “phenomenon” first appears in the translation/, which contains: 1. the original German term “Erscheinung” and 2. a reference to the “Terminological Supplement” regarding this topic.

    v     c / to kindly send me a copy of those parts of the minutes of Committee meetings in which the discussion on the translation of the word Erscheinung took place.

    v     d / to kindly return both copies of “Critique” I recently sent to the Committee /the original edited by R. Schmidt and the translation by Kemp Smith/, as I will need them for the development of the “Terminological Supplement” and the index.

    v     e / Please kindly let me know if it is agreeable that I submit the Terminological Supplement and the index terms by the end of February 1955. /I shall send in the last part of the “Introduction” in a few days/.

  1. I kindly ask of you to send me a copy of Spinoza’s Ethics. Actually, I would expect to receive two copies: as a member of the Committee and as the department head who worked on improving the translation of Ethics for 5 months.


My deepest respect