You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
17th March 1966.
Dear Hans,
I hope you were pleased with the reception of your paper last night.1 It was very interesting and important.
In regard to the tiny detail that I threw in at the end, this certainly did not call for a reply. I would like to say, however, that it is very confusing in the Society when various terms are used as if they were fully accepted. I am sure you know exactly what you mean when you say: “dangerous parts. … derivatives of the death instinct. … must be expelled” etc. etc. I myself do not know what you mean and at least half the Society will feel that you are simply saying “death instinct” instead of using the words “aggression” and “hate.” You may feel this is very unimportant, as indeed it is in the context of your paper, but it would be really valuable in the Society if we could find a common language. Sometime or other when you have nothing to do would you feel like rewriting that sentence without using the words “death instinct,” just for my benefit?
Thanking you again for the paper,
Yours,