THE PHILOSOPHICAL BATTLEFIELD
257
observed that to the extent that it followed philosophical dogmas the
Soviet government was really conservative. "This is a congress of
philosophy, not of politics," he declared. To those who had heard
Messrs. Kolman,
Rieger,
and Banfi and others, this was extremely
puzzling.*
Much more serious was the attitude revealed by the official
delegates authorized to speak for their national philosophical societies
towards the resolution introduced at the executive session of the Con–
gress. This resolution, in behalf of the principle of freedom of in–
quiry
in
philosophy, seemed innocuous enough. It proclaimed that
the vitality and growth of philosophy depended upon free circulation
of ideas. It deplored the imposition of any extra-philosophical pres–
sures anywhere throughout the world against philosophers in quest
of the truth. It called upon the Congress to affirm its belief
in
the
right to teach and learn, and its conviction that valid philosophical
conclusions could be won only through argument and evidence. What
it said was no more than that philosophy was not a matter for the
police.
Resolutions of this kind have been standard procedure at na–
tional and international Congresses since the rise of HitIerism. Con–
gresses of scientists often adopt similar resolutions on freedom of
scientific inquiry. To the astonishment of the accredited delegates,
the reception which greeted this innocent expression of philosophic
faith precipitated one of the stormiest discussions of the Congress.
It was as
if
the chaplain's invocation, which opens so many official
meetings, had become the subject of furious debate. Professor Pos,
without even leaving the chair, violently denounced the resolution.
"If
this resolution is adopted," he declared with angry vehemence,
"it
will spoil the Congress." Some of his words gave the impression
that rather than present it to the final public meeting of the Congress,
he would resign. He was supported, rather shamefacedly, in his op–
position by those who represented philosophical societies in France
and Belgium. The philosophers from England, Argentina, Switzer-
*
Since the above was written I have received word that Professor Pos has
become an eloquent defender before D utch audiences of the resolutions adopted
at the Communist World Congress of Intellectuals at Wroclaw-Breslau, Poland.
I am not surprised. It explains the political tendentiousness he displayed at the
Amsterdam Congress and his failure to distinguish between his function as an
objective Chairman of the Congress and his personal privilege as a member.
