SALZBURG

Dr. LUDWIG GOLD SCHMIDT: IGNORANCE AND ARBITRARINESS

My work refutes Einstein’s assertions.

His Relativity understands nothing of the relativity of sensual knowledge and does not deserve the name of a “theory”.

Everything that can be peeled out as correct in the remarks of Einstein and his proclaimer Weyl is partly ancient. What could be described as new is a mistake that was predicted by me years ago and, as my writing shows, by Kant.

Einstein and Weyl operate in an area for which precise and reliable philosophical knowledge must be assumed.

Their ignorance, however, is only exceeded by the grotesque inflation of a self-consciousness that can be characterized by the following words: Everything Einstein does not understand, because understanding requires knowledge that he lacks, “is without meaning and dark.”

To really understand the error of their speculations, Einstein and Weyl will need several years of study.

Professor Dr. A. H. DE HARTOG / AMSTERDAM: PHILOSOPHIC BACKGROUNDS

Many believe that through his theory:

• everything has become “relative”
• nothing is fixed any more

1. If the temporal orientation may change from a subjective point of view, it is not yet said that time cannot therefore be a “form of existence” in objective reality (see, inter alia, Ed. von Hartmann’s transcendental realism).

The subjective orientation in the midst of the temporal event may be relative, but objectively there may nevertheless be a temporal constellation at the same time, which is not readily compatible with the sub- orientation stands and falls.

2. Although the subjective orientation in the temporal1 ) “Against Einstein’s metaphysics. A critic. Liberation.” Lübeck 1923.13

events would turn out to be relative, the arithmetical and geometric numbers and formulas with which the subjective-relative orientations are calculated remain constant as such, as arithmetic and mathematical data, under which one use the relative temporal orientation.

Thirdly, if relativism were to be mentioned here, this relativism, in the midst of the RTH itself, is to be understood only physically, i.e. solely in relation to the natural, material events. But this natural, material, physical event exceeds the aesthetic, ethical, philosophical and religious values, which do not stand or fall with a potentially physical event. Because the above values show up as a “duty”, “idea” “Ideal” etc. about -natural, even anti-natural. The evaluation of these values is therefore not physical, but a metaphysical one. Fourthly, although these values should be relative, the human spirit nevertheless refers all, even these relative values, to the absolute, to the thought, the spirit, god or whatever word one may choose, in order to mean that unity is in- the midst of the multiplicity of science, wisdom and religion. Fifth, Einstein’s assertion of a finite universe is very suitable for making scientific, philosophical, and theological discussions about the spirit transcendent beyond this universe.