DOC.
530 MAY 1918 547
530. From
David Hilbert
Göttingen,
1
May
1918
Dear
Colleague,
After
in-depth
discussion with all of
my friends,
incl.
Max
Lehmann,
I must
unfortunately
advise
against your well-meaning
and
appealing undertaking.[1]
Such
declarations,
if
they
are
to
be
even
only passably outspoken
and
are
not
to
appear
entirely
weak and
insipid,
would be tantamount to
self-denunciations,
which all
our
enemies in
the
faculties would be
extremely glad
to
cite. Even
your
name
would not shield you-since
the
very
word “international”
is
like
a
red
cloth to
a
bull
for
our
colleagues,
when
they
feel
in
corpore
among
themselves.
But
we
would also
damage
the
cause.
Just
as
the
Deutsche
Zeitung by
its
attack
solidified Kuhlmann’s shaken
position,[2]
just
as
Count
Spee
is
working
at
this
moment toward
saving
equal
voting
rights,[3]
thus
we
also would achieve
the
contrary
of
what
we
intend
right
now.
What
is
most
important,
though:
we
would fire
off
our
gunpowder
at
the
wrong
time and
possibly
also at
the
wrong
persons.
I
can
understand
perfectly
the
urge,
which I
feel just
as
you
do,
to
do
something;
but
I
would
like
to recommend
waiting
until
the
mad hurricane
has
spent
itself
and
reason
has
the
opportunity of
returning-and
this
time
is
sure
to
come.[4] We
would have to
restrict
ourselves
to
German
profs.,
since
they
alone
are
thoroughly
known to
us
here and also have most
to
do with it.
Other
peoples
must wash
their
own
dirty
laundry.
I would
then
suggest
our
writing
a
joint open
letter
to
Germany’s professors
and
scholars, every
word of which
would have
to
be unassailable and act
like
a
resounding
blow,
where
we
say
what
science
is
and
what the
responsibilities
of science
are.
And
that
is
why
I make
you
this
suggestion
first
of all:
as soon as
your
health
permits,
come
here for
some
time.
G[öttingen] now
has its
prettiest
season, as
regards
nature;
you
would
feel
very
comfortable here
among
our
circle.
Here
you
would have
simple
but
good
care,
could also
be
on your own
in
your
room as
much
as you like,
and-we
could
discuss
and
prepare
all of these
plans
for
the
future.
Finally,
third,
does
the
list of
names
you yourself
have drawn
up
not
appall you?[5]
Max Lehmann
is
essentially
good;
but
he
cannot
possibly
fulfill
your
wish.
Troeltsch
has,
as
you know, gone
over
to
the
annexationists.[6]
Schucking
is
a
politician
and
is
very
wellknown
as
such;[7]
he
can
say
nothing
new,
and what he
says
is
immediately
stamped
as
pure politics
and
filed
away.
Weber
(Heidelberg)[8]
is
generally
not
appealing
to
me-at least
not
altogether.
Previous Page Next Page