For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.
Ferenczi, S. (1922). Letter from Sándor Ferenczi to Sigmund Freud, November 22, 1922. The Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi Volume 3, 1920-1933, 88-89.
Ferenczi, S. (1922). Letter from Sándor Ferenczi to Sigmund Freud, November 22, 1922. The Correspondence of Sigmund Freud and Sándor Ferenczi Volume 3, 1920-1933, 88-89
Letter from Sándor Ferenczi to Sigmund Freud, November 22, 1922
Budapest, November 22, 1922
As an impartial observer of the events within the Committee, I hasten to share with you my views about them.
In the current question (the trifle about the secretary's report to the Korrespondenzblatt),1 Rank is definitely right. It would have been nonsense to value formalities and agencies as more important than the interest of the cause itself. But on the whole I find that the (often quite unjustified) sensitivity of Abraham and Jones must be spared, precisely in the interest of the cause. We must do everything to forestall dissension within the Committee. Misunderstandings should be eliminated by amicable discussion, and even in scientific questions one shouldn't offend the most loyal adherents. I am convinced that both Abraham and Jones, if we make them aware of certain errors (while sparing their sensitivities, of course), will not be closed off to insight into certain of their own insufficiencies.
But I can't protest vehemently enough about the idea of Rank's, which was certainly only planted in the heat of the battle, that the constitution of the Committee, or even the form of the Zeitschrift should be tampered with. The Zeitschrift is and remains the soul of the whole movement; it must under all circumstances be saved and maintained.
It was, perhaps, unavoidable that little special alliances also formed within the Committee from time to time.
[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]