This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
98 as this account was less liable to lead into error provided the methods are correct. That even here a [[red underlined]] so called exact Science had struck a snag. [[/red underlined]] In chemistry we are used to this and we are ready to change our theories as often as we strike our paradox. But for [[red underlined]] mathematicians this was a hard pill to swallow. [[/red underlined]] Some them swallowed it and made up their mind to start anew along new methods and [[red underlined]] accept [[/red underlined]] the [[red underlined]] existence of the paradox, [[/red underlined]] fortified with the idea that if it took so many thousand years to strike this paradox it will probably take again so many thousand year before they strike the next [[strikethrough]] parado [[/strikethrough]] paradox. He tells that some mathematicians [[end page]] [[start page]] 99 in [[red underlined]] France made up their mind to ignore the paradox [[/red underlined]] and went on as heretofore. - "Those" he says" [[strikethrough]] a[[?]] [[/strikethrough]] [[red underlined]] are bound to see their mathematics perish". [[/red underlined]] All this seems very impressive to me and explains why some men persist in error. - If [[red underlined]] such things can happen in mathematics [[/red underlined]] how much more is it liable to happen in such incomparably more complicated matters as [[red underlined]] sociology, politics, religion [[/red underlined]] etc. Germany and Austria with their remnants of the feudal system and their cult of everything for the Hohenzollerns or the Hapsburgs have struck their paradox long ago but still [[red underlined]] persist in their logic instead [[/red underlined]] of side stepping. [[strikethrough]] For the [[/strikethrough]] The same thing applies to [[strikethrough]] every [[/strikethrough]] [[red underlined]] every line of action [[/red underlined]] every line of thought or argu-