Letter to Władysław Tatarkiewicz written 25.11.1952
I thank you most cordially for fulfilling my request and for the telegram which arrived yesterday and the letter I received today. If I am again allowing myself to occupy you with these matters of mine, it’s just because, despite everything, the situation does not seem entirely clear to me. The reason for this is that I don’t really understand whether the telegram is meant as a supplement to the letter, supposed to remove certain doubts raised by the letter, or whether you simply didn’t trust the speed of the post and decided to telegraph based on the same information used to compose the letter, because the letter, or rather the information cited in it, leaves doubt as to whether the nomination, which is lying around at the Institute of Philosophy, includes only a mistake as to initials, or whether it’s simply a nomination for my son Roman Stanisław (similar to the one that occurred in reference to the so-called Editorial Council of Philosophical Thought). Appointing him a member of the Scientific Council of the Institute of Philosophy, it seems to me, is not out of the question. It might therefore be a good thing if the Philosophical Institute would at least inform (by phone) the Ministry as to whom this nomination actually refers to. If to me, it seems to me in any case that it should be formally corrected. It’s possible, however, that yesterday you were at the U.W. [University of Warsaw] Dean’s office again and learned there that my nomination for Warsaw (as a professor at U.W.?) had been signed, and that this is how your telegram should be understood. If that’s essentially the way it is, then please don’t bother yourself with the whole business. If, however, the telegram was based on the same information as the letter, then – although I’ll be in Warsaw soon myself in connection with the Library of Classics of Philosophy Editorial Committee – I’d be very grateful if you’d be so gracious as to drop by the Institute or the Dean’s office once again, in order to eliminate the above-mentioned doubts. It’s possible, moreover, that in the text of the nomination of R. S. Ingarden as a member of the Scientific Council of the Philosophical Institute, it says something about him being a professor at the Jagiellonian University. In that case, it seems to me, the doubt would be eliminated, and it would only be a case of a mistake regarding the initials.
I’m a bit wary of announcing Szuman’s lecture at the Polish Academy of Learning, given that the date of the Library of Classics of Philosophy Committee meeting has not yet been set and that it’s not impossible that it’ll be set for 5/12. Since at the moment I see no way out of it, tomorrow I’ll go to the Polish Academy of Learning and announce (for now, only) Szuman’s lecture. XX[O1] Since you raise no objections in your letter to the date of Ms Gołaszewska’s lecture (15/12), I could[O2] announce this lecture as well, but there’s still time.
I thank you cordially once again for your help with my affairs and attach cordial greetings
26/11 I’ve held back this letter until now, because I expected that today’s mail might bring some clarification. However, since that didn’t happen, I’m sending you the letter, once again apologising for disturbing you with my affairs.
XX[O3] I was just about to go to the post office when your telegram about Szuman’s lecture arrived (at 4.30 pm). Since I haven’t announced (the lecture) yet, everything is all right. The date of Szuman’s lecture needs to be set only after his return to Cracow, which won’t be until 1/12/52.
[O1]W wersji oryginalnej
[O3]W wersji oryginalnej