BRACERS Record Detail for 52606
To access the original letter, email the Russell Archives.
BR found geometrical optics and spherical astronomy incredibly dull, but he had to learn them.
Kate should persist in the Ph.D., "as it will very greatly increase your earning capacity, and you cannot tell what may be necessary...." Amiel was "feckless". Kate is right about wickedness, and John wrong: "It is not all ignorance."
On human knowledge; on God and veracity, and damning all who believe in him, "as having sinned against veracity". Religion. Patricia is happy and calm.
BR TO KATHARINE TAIT, 8 DEC. 1946
BRACERS 52606. ALS. McMaster. SLBR 2: #476
Edited by N. Griffin. Proofread by K. Blackwell
Trinity College
Cambridge.
8 Dec.1946.
Dear Kate
Thank you for your very good letter of Nov. 15. I am sorry for you about Gothic;1 you feel about it as I did in youth about geometrical optics and spherical optics and spherical astronomy, two subjects of incredible dullness which I had to get up. I feel strongly, however, that you should persist in the Ph.D., as it will very greatly increase your earning capacity, and you cannot tell what may be necessary — you might, e.g., find yourself some day a widow with two young children.
I am interested to hear that you are in love again, and the man sounds suitable for my parental blessing.2 You may tell him from me that you are a very lovable person, and would make an admirable wife if you loved your husband. I should like you to be married, as I think children would add greatly to your happiness; but you should not marry a feckless person like Amiel, whom you would have to mother. Children, not husbands, are the proper objects of maternal emotions; otherwise intolerable psychological tangles result.
What you say about John and Susan is encouraging; I got the same impression from his letters. He wrote telling me she was threatened with a miscarriage and couldn’t travel, which is a pity; I hope all will go well with her.
Dear Kate, you needn’t apologize for the “earnestness” of your letters; I like them so. Your are right and John is wrong about wickedness: it is not all ignorance. As to your doubt whether we “know” anything: “knowledge” is a matter of degree, not an absolute. There is a graduation:
Present perception → recent memory → more distant memory, → concordant testimony on matters of fact having little emotional interest → inferences to future occurrences in accordance with well-attested regularities (tomorrow’s sunrise) → scientific laws. For all these there is evidence of varying degrees of strength; for religion, none. As for fear of Hell, I suggest the following hypothesis: God values veracity above all other virtues, and has refrained from giving us evidence of His existence; therefore He[tn]
His ... He written over his ... he[/tn] will damn all those who believe in Him, as having sinned against veracity.
Ask your Lutheran friend about I Kings VII, 23.3
You should think seriously about religion; but remember the First Commandment: “Thou shalt not believe what there is no reason to suppose true”.
I hear you gave John $100. As I have given him $200, I have suggested his giving back the $100 to you.
Conrad is still happy and flourishing. Peter is well and happy and calmer than I have ever known her. Much love. Merry Xmas.
Your
Diddy
There is nothing I want except your letters.
- 1
Gothic A subject she was studying without much pleasure at Radcliffe.
- 2
I am interested to hear that you are in love again … blessing. Nothing came of this relationship.
- 3
I Kings VII, 23 The passage reads: “And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from one brim to the other; it was round all about, and his height was five cubits; and a line of thirty cubits did encompass it round about.” It is difficult to imagine what point was to be made with its help — except, perhaps, that the sea’s circumference ought to have been given as just over 31.4 cubits, a not-very-serious lapse of precision on the part of the good book.
