BR TO W.W. NORTON & COMPANY, INC. / WARDER NORTON, 20 MAY 1940
BRACERS 47330. TLS. Norton papers, Columbia U.
Proofread by K. Blackwell and A. Duncan

212 Loring Avenue
Los Angeles1
May 20 1940

Dear Warder,

With all due respect and affection I want to point out that it is for you to publish this book — or not to publish it, as you wish — and for me to write it and choose the title. You and your colleagues cannot possibly know whether or not the title I have chosen is descriptive or not because (a) you have not read the book (b) you are not philosophers. I and my colleagues and students, on the other hand, have both qualifications, and we have decided unanimously on “An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth” after a number of other suggestions, including “Language Fact and Truth” had been rejected as inaccurate, misleading, or unattractive.

It was remarked that in addition to being accurate, this title is peculiarly appropriate and characteristic, since it emphasises the tentative spirit of inquiry as opposed to that of the dogmatists.

As for its not being a title at all: if this is so, then few if any of the great philosophical books in the world have had titles. What about these:

Hume. An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding.
             A Treatise of Human Nature.
Descartes. A Discourse of Method.
Kant. A Critique of Pure Reason.
Spinoza. Tractatus Theologico-philosophicus.

to take only a few. A later example, Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, was certainly not injured by its title. Indeed, I doubt whether it would ever have acquired the prestige that it has with a more popular title. As for whether or not a philosopher would understand the implications of the title I have chosen, I really think you should be prepared to admit that I am a better judge of this than you. You can judge better than I can whether or not such a book will sell; but in connection with this book that is a question of minor importance.

In short, An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth is from a philosophical point of view not only an adequate title but an ideal one, and I don’t intend to change it.

I’m afraid you will be even less pleased with the abstract2 I am sending you. I have made it as simple as possible, but the more I work on the book the more abstruse it becomes. It cannot be popular; but it should at least serve to show up Judge McGeehan! I shall remark in the Preface that it was thought too salacious for New York students.

You are most kind to wish to publish, but don’t hesitate to change your mind if you find you can’t bear what I offer you.

I am glad you got the remaining copies of Principles of Mathematics over before Hitler dropped bombs on them.

Yours sincerely,
Bertrand Russell.

• 1

  [document] Proofread against a microfilm printout of the original.

• 2

  the abstract Not found, unless it is the basis of what is printed on the flaps of the American dust-jacket.