Log in to Scripto | Recent changes | View item | View file | Transcribe page | View history
Paine, Merlin M., December 8, 1947.
6.5.3.1.jpg
| Revision as of Jun 5, 2015 12:04:02 PM created by 128.193.164.143 |
Revision as of Jun 5, 2015 12:05:37 PM edited by 128.193.164.143 |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
In a letter to you on November 15th, I have already commented on the ideas in your Atlantic Monthly article with particular reference to the following: "One strength of the Communist system of the East is that it has some of the character of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion. Unless the cause of peace based on law gathers behind it the force and zeal of a religion, it hardly can hope to succeed. Those to whom the moral teaching of the human race is entrusted surely have a great duty and a great opportunity." | In a letter to you on November 15th, I have already commented on the ideas in your Atlantic Monthly article with particular reference to the following: "One strength of the Communist system of the East is that it has some of the character of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion. Unless the cause of peace based on law gathers behind it the force and zeal of a religion, it hardly can hope to succeed. Those to whom the moral teaching of the human race is entrusted surely have a great duty and a great opportunity." | ||
| − | + | I am recognizing you as an expert on atomic issues. If your Atlantic Monthly article suggests that you have no responsibility for "the moral teaching of the human race", then I am hoping that you may be willing to commission me in your behalf on the moral side. | |
With my last letter I sent you a "Rough Draft" entitled "Building a Science of Opinion". Knowing how terrifically busy you must be, it may be an imposition on my part to assume that you have time to read such a document. However, it has been read by the secretary of the American Philosophical Society who writes: "My first reaction is that it is a sound, sober, and ambitious effort at intellectual reconstruction. How administratively feasible it may be, I, of course, cannot judge. But after I read it over more carefully I may have some suggestions." The letter further outlined how I might get consideration for the document at the annual meeting of the Society, just after Christmas. | With my last letter I sent you a "Rough Draft" entitled "Building a Science of Opinion". Knowing how terrifically busy you must be, it may be an imposition on my part to assume that you have time to read such a document. However, it has been read by the secretary of the American Philosophical Society who writes: "My first reaction is that it is a sound, sober, and ambitious effort at intellectual reconstruction. How administratively feasible it may be, I, of course, cannot judge. But after I read it over more carefully I may have some suggestions." The letter further outlined how I might get consideration for the document at the annual meeting of the Society, just after Christmas. | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
It would be very helpful, at the meting of the American Philosophical Society, if your direct approval of this effort could be known. The time is short and a wire to me, collect, would be very much appreciated. A possible wording might be as follows: | It would be very helpful, at the meting of the American Philosophical Society, if your direct approval of this effort could be known. The time is short and a wire to me, collect, would be very much appreciated. A possible wording might be as follows: | ||
| + | |||
"Merlin M. Paine Community Chest and Council 1535 Summit Ave Seattle 22, Washington | "Merlin M. Paine Community Chest and Council 1535 Summit Ave Seattle 22, Washington | ||
Revision as of Jun 5, 2015 12:05:37 PM
December 3,1947
Dr. Albert Einstein Emergency Committee of Atomic Scientists 90 Nassau Street Princeton, N.J.
Personal Attention
Dear Dr. Einstein:
The enclosed coupon, as you know, was accompanied to my office by your letter of November 26th, and also by a copy of your Atlantic Monthly article on "Atomic War or Peace". The enclosed check is a small endorsement of your cause.
In a letter to you on November 15th, I have already commented on the ideas in your Atlantic Monthly article with particular reference to the following: "One strength of the Communist system of the East is that it has some of the character of a religion and inspires the emotions of a religion. Unless the cause of peace based on law gathers behind it the force and zeal of a religion, it hardly can hope to succeed. Those to whom the moral teaching of the human race is entrusted surely have a great duty and a great opportunity."
I am recognizing you as an expert on atomic issues. If your Atlantic Monthly article suggests that you have no responsibility for "the moral teaching of the human race", then I am hoping that you may be willing to commission me in your behalf on the moral side.
With my last letter I sent you a "Rough Draft" entitled "Building a Science of Opinion". Knowing how terrifically busy you must be, it may be an imposition on my part to assume that you have time to read such a document. However, it has been read by the secretary of the American Philosophical Society who writes: "My first reaction is that it is a sound, sober, and ambitious effort at intellectual reconstruction. How administratively feasible it may be, I, of course, cannot judge. But after I read it over more carefully I may have some suggestions." The letter further outlined how I might get consideration for the document at the annual meeting of the Society, just after Christmas.
It is not my document that merits endorsement, but rather a belief that it is possible to establish a mathematical framework for conflicting opinions (ideologies, religions,thought,etc) which will justify the differences and take them out of competition with each other. The document that I forwarded is designed merely to make plausible the assumption that since individual philosophies are based on limited experience, all philosophies are limited. Different philosophies are therefore more essentially supplementary than contradictory and it may be possible to find a framework into which all will fit. My document is still in a rough draft and needs criticism of Jews, Catholics, Protestants, Mohammedans, Russians and others, and must even then remain a rough draft. However, it should be possible to accumulate confidence en route that a unifying framework for all philosophies is perfectly feasible.
It would be very helpful, at the meting of the American Philosophical Society, if your direct approval of this effort could be known. The time is short and a wire to me, collect, would be very much appreciated. A possible wording might be as follows:
"Merlin M. Paine Community Chest and Council 1535 Summit Ave Seattle 22, Washington