To the Editor:
My comment refers to William Barrett’s splendid article “The Twentieth Century in its Philosophy” [April]. Though I am not an idealist, my interest was aroused by the proposition the author quoted from F. H. Bradley: “nothing real could possibly exist.” I would like to suggest that this was merely the statement of an arrogant Hegelian philosopher. As so often happens with idealists, Bradley was obsessed with the conclusion he wished to reach. For even if one concedes to him his description of existence and definition of what is really real, the most that can be logically concluded is that “nothing real is known to exist.” Though neither is very appealing, there seems to be an infinity of difference between the two statements.
James Woodruff
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
_____________