And when, as happened at times, his conversation
became passionate, when he made a movement in the air with
his stick or his umbrella as if he were fighting an invisible
ghost, one was always reminded of a person from the imag-
inary circles of E.
became passionate, when he made a movement in the air with
his stick or his umbrella as if he were fighting an invisible
ghost, one was always reminded of a person from the imag-
inary circles of E.
Weininger - 1946 - Mind and Death of a Genius
In any case, he cannot have heard
more than that word, for that was all I knew" (pp. 6-7).
2 It is beyond the scope of this book to judge between Weininger and Swoboda
on one side and Fliess on the other. Bisexuality, as a concept, seems to have
been defined as early as 1846, by A. Berthold, in his essay, "Geschlechtseigen-
tumlichkeiten" (Handworterbuch der Psychologie, Vol. I; see Swoboda, Die
Forschung, p. 8), so it would seem that neither Weininger nor Swoboda nor
Fliess had priority on the word. It is interesting to see what Freud himself wrote
in this connection: "As recently as 1906, W. Fliess (Der Abhuf des Lebens)
has claimed ownership of the idea of bisexuality (in the sense of double sex).
In uninformed circles assertion is made that the philosopher, O. Weininger,
is the authority for the human bisexuality conception since this idea is made
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 44 Student and Genius
given me the answer to this, too: "Weininger was never my pa-
tient, but one of his friends was. Through this means Weininger
became acquainted with the views on bisexuality which I had
already applied in my analysis, prompted by Fliess" (Letter
XIV).
This evidence is also supported by an article "Otto Wei-
ninger Plagiarist," written by Julius Kraus (in Die Wage, No.
43, October, 1906, p. 970). The article says that Fliess wrote
a book Vber den Ablauf des Lebens, which had just recently
been published. During the many years he worked on it, he
kept Freud informed about his progress. Professor Freud dis-
cussed the book with his friend and patient, Dr. Hermann
Swoboda in Vienna, who was an intimate friend of Otto
Weininger. In this way Weininger became familiar with the
ideas of Dr. Fliess.
This concept of bisexuality strongly affected Weininger's
sensitive mind. It became rooted in him; since it was men-
tioned to him when he was on his own for the first time, the
effect was unusually strong.
Such a phenomenon is often seen in people of a nature like
Weininger's. When a minor event registers in the mind of a
particular disposition, little significance may be attached to '
it in the beginning. Yet because of the particular mechanism of
the psychological reactions, the event, unimportant as it may
appear, eventually grows stronger in effect and may even be-
come the turning point of development. Thus, what Weininger
was told of bisexuality was destined to be of decisive impor-
tance in his life.
Bisexuality was not the original basis for his thesis. The
cursory sketches of this work which were read by Oskar Ewald
(pseudonym for Oskar Friedlander) were more concerned with
talent than with sex, and they were intended for use in an at-
tempt to obtain a scholarship. Further, Weininger's work was
the foundation of his rather hasty work," Geschlect und Charakter, 1903
(Freud, Basic Writings, ed. by A. A. Brill, Modern Library ed. , New York,
1938, p. 559).
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 45
not originally called Sex and Character but Eros and Psyche,
a title he later changed because of its literary coloring.
From the moment that Weininger became aware of the
problem of bisexuality, he began collecting his material. The
theory of bisexuality led him to believe that man and woman
were not separated distinctly from each other, but that there
was in every individual a mixture of masculine and feminine
substance (Sex and Character, pp. 9-10).
Thus, he reduced all differences between man and woman
to one single principle, the sex difference; but in doing so, he
placed more value on man than on woman; indeed as we shall
see later, he reduced woman's position in absurdum.
The dominating idea of bisexuality influenced him greatly.
This particular subject absorbed all his energy, and he worked
day and night to solve the sexual problem. "We spent many
a night together, often with other friends, discussing practically
everything he wanted to work out further. " 3 The work fasci-
nated him, and his absorption in it was increased by his study
of empiric criticism, a positivistic, pragmatic view at that time
predominant at the University of Vienna.
This viewpoint made Weininger at the beginning of his
university career an extreme antimetaphysicist. He became,
so to say, ametaphysical and was mainly occupied with us-
ing science in a broad sense to solve the problem of knowl-
edge. It was no coincidence that Kant's problem, "How is
experience possible? " had a deep influence on him. Like Kant,
he searched for the conditions of knowledge and for its proof,
sharing with him the opinion that the basis for knowledge was
a combination of empirical and rational material.
Weininger's was a positivistic view. As an intellectual with-
out any disposition toward metaphysics or mysticism, he at
this time subscribed to the words of Auguste Comte: Savoir
pour prevoir, peur pouvoir. Following the teachings of Pro-
tagoras and Hume, Weininger considered experience as the
* Emil Lucka, Otto Weininger: Der Mensch und sein Werk (Vienna, 1905).
Hereafter cited in the text simply as Lucka.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 46 Student and Genius
only foundation of knowledge. Along this trend of thought
he met empiric criticism. He was familiar with the doctrines
as early as 1899 and 1900, but he became better acquainted
with them after having been drawn into a group which in-
cluded his friend of later days, Emil Lucka. Lucka relates how
several young men who took an interest in the problem of
knowledge formed a small discussion group. "During 1901 we
got together once a week in the workshop belonging to the
father of one of the group. Guided by some trained men, we
read Richard Avenarius's Kritik der reinen Erfanning (Cri-
tique of Pure Experience). We were very serious about it;
we would often discuss one sentence for hours. "
Thus--in colorful reality--the young men got together in
the evenings and late into the night discussed the man whose
psychological and philosophical views were at this time a focal
point in philosophical circles in Vienna. It is not hard to guess
that Otto Weininger did not take much part in the discus-
sions. But let us hear what Lucka says of how he behaved: "He
was usually silent during the discussions, apparently making
his own observations. We went together most of the way home,
arid I found that our ideas concurred amazingly. Although I
was the older, he knew far more than I and told me much I did
not know. I asked him to come to see me, and we became good
friends in a very short while. We were equally interested in all
problems of psychology and philosophy, and agreed on most
points. However, when he found an observation on women I
had made in one of my earlier essays, we were in utter accord
with each other" (Lucka, p. 4).
There seems to be no doubt that the discussions in the group
made a deep impression upon Weininger's receptive and un-
prepared mind. Perhaps he at bottom was in discord with their
views; yet for the time being his own protests were overruled
by the group and he became a strong adherent to the theo-
retical and methodological principles of Avenarius. 4
* The influence of Avenarius is quite noticeable in Weininget's first scientific
researches. The principles of Avenarius's methods obviously were used as models
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 47
Weininger's studies became more "empirical," and he him-
self was now taking an eager interest in the natural sciences.
In the fall and winter of 1900 he worked feverishly at collect-
ing research data, and he arrived early in 1901, according to
his own statement, at the "Law of Sexual Attraction. " This
formulation was an important event to him. He seemed exceed-
ingly happy about his discovery and explained with great joy
the mathematical formula of his law to his good friend,
Swoboda, whom he met practically every day at that time. As
it later turned out, however, his joy did not endure, for he
then discovered that Schopenhauer had earlier found this same
law (Sex and Character, p. 489).
In any event, as his work fanned out, he started to deal with
the problem of homosexuality and the emancipation of
woman, but his studies still remained on the surface empirical.
During this period of intense activity he was incessantly
occupied. When he was at home he had dinner only two or
three times weekly, and sometimes he ate only bare necessi-
ties, not even his supper (see Der Fall, p. 8). In the summer of
1901, while he was staying in a little garden house in Piirkers-
dorf, near Vienna, he wrote down his ideas with terrific energy
and at a forced tempo. Lucka says (p. 75), "Otto Weininger
in a month assimilated as many books and thought inde-
pendently about as many matters as other talented men would
in the course of one or more years. " The manuscript, amount-
ing to 120 pages in all, was to be his doctor's thesis (see Swo-
boda, Die Forschung, p. 14).
He harmonized his style with his subject; therefore the writ-
ing is, by and large, quiet, although one can feel his blazing
spirit behind the apparently calm front. The reader has the
distinct impression that the author is working within limits
far too narrow for such an indomitable mind. On the surface,
when Weininger applied the same methods. Another basic similarity between
Avenarius and Weininger is the way they both start from a biological founda-
tion. One can also note the influence of Avenarius's terminology. The real
content of his general conception of experience is explained in his Der mensch-
liche Weltbegriff (Leipzig, 1891).
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 48 Student and Genius
however, everything was calm although there was disquiet
fermenting underneath, in a fermentation which was a warn-
ing of a mental change.
Because of his strong mental conflicts, Weininger was dis-
satisfied with life as early as the summer of 1900. With his
brooding and introverted make-up, he was probably very much
concerned with himself and with what he believed to be his
great mission.
The result of his feverish activity was that he overestimated
the importance of his work. "It was an investigation of prin-
ciple that he was making. It was pure law in practice that he
was studying. He was reducing the difference between man and
woman to one basic principle. " As his self-esteem grew, the
value of his work mounted in his eyes, and it became so im-
portant and took on such a large scale that all his surroundings
had to be included in it. As his work proceeded, it became more
and more a part of him. Even though his study--at least to a
certain degree--dealt with natural science, it still carried a per-
sonal touch, which became more and more pronounced until
finally the whole was only personal. Then Sex and Character
was a part of himself, involving his own life.
Thus, his writing at that time was partly built on empirical
facts and was instigated by his sense of reality. Intermingled
with them in a peculiar way were speculative, mystical ele-
ments which were closely related to his own fantasies and led
him to a distorted view. The question of sexual differences,
which should have been the starting point for his study, finally
became the goal instead. The idea of reducing all differences
between man and woman to one basic principle reflected his
daydreams, and he felt obliged to bring his concept of the sexual
problem into accord with his cosmic view. Gradually he be-
came more and more engrossed in his daydreams, and as he
tried to solve his life problems, a greater and greater distance
yawned between the reality which existed and the "reality"
he found in his own thoughts.
It seems quite certain that Otto Weininger sought to make
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 49
his spirit encompass all human problems, but the attitude itself
revealed his own defects. Ewald remarked rightly, "The power
of his influence was in the human impulse which accompanied
him and which expressed itself in all his shortcomings and all
his immaturity (he was just twenty! )" (Letter V).
The collection of material in the period from the fall of 1900
to the summer of 1901 was the external side of his activity.
But though there was considerable internal activity also, he did
not then give any sign of a mental change. The outsider could
see only that in his locked-up mind a great deal of introspec-
tion was going on. This gave him an air of secrecy. Strindberg
described him in a letter to Gerber as a "strange, mysterious
man. "
Secrecy went well with his striking appearance. "The slender
body was rigid and without any elasticity or grace. His move-
ments were abrupt and helpless, never impulsive. His lack of
grace was so much more remarkable when one noticed the
hesitating way his hand would grasp a thing and then sud-
denly take a hard grip on it. If his movements were hesitant
and weak, his grip was strong and hard, so that his hand was
no more a regular hand, but a fist. He dressed shabbily. His
way of walking was undecided, and he would often walk with
his chin resting on his chest. But sometimes he would race
along" (Taschenbuch, p. 6).
Gerber gives the following picture: "Nobody who had once
seen his face could ever forget it. The big dome of his fore-
head marked it. The face was peculiar looking because of the
large eyes; the look in them seemed to surround everything. In
spite of his youth, his face was not handsome: it was rather
ugly. Never did I see him laugh or smile. His face was always
dignified and serious. Only when he was outdoors in spring
did it seem to relax, and then become cheerful and bright. At
many concerts he would shine with happiness. In the most
wonderful moments we spent together, particularly when he
talked about an idea in which he was interested, his eyes were
filled with happiness. Otherwise his face was impenetrable.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 5?
Student and Genius
One could never, up to the last few months, find in his face
any hint of what was happening deep within his soul. The
taut muscles would often move, and sharp wrinkles would
appear on his face, as if they were caused by intolerable pain.
If asked for the reason, he controlled himself at once, gave a
vague or evasive answer, or talked about other matters, mak-
ing further questioning impossible. His manners would occa-
sionally elicit surprise, and often a smile. He cared little for
traditions and prejudices.
"The influence of his personality seemed strongest at night.
His body seemed to grow; there was something ghostlike in
his movements and there would be something demoniac in his
manner.
And when, as happened at times, his conversation
became passionate, when he made a movement in the air with
his stick or his umbrella as if he were fighting an invisible
ghost, one was always reminded of a person from the imag-
inary circles of E. Th. A. Hoffmann.
"I have often thought of one particular evening: we had
been wandering around the Votivkirche for a long time. He
had kept me company to my home, and then I went back
with him part of the way until, finally, after hours of walking
late at night, we were outside my home again. We shook
hands. Not a sound was heard except our own voices, not a
soul in the street except the two of us. He looked at me and
whistled. 'Have you ever thought of your own double? What
if he came now? Your double is the man who knows every-
thing about you, even that which nobody tells. ' Then he
turned around and disappeared" (Taschenbuch, pp. 6-8).
No matter what form his activities took, they were rooted
deep within himself. He was never able to run away from
himself, to enjoy wholeheartedly things that other people
liked. He seemed always compelled to have a reason for his
behavior, even if that reason were acceptable only to himself.
No wonder that his conduct not infrequently called forth
smiles from the fellow men around him.
His attitude when he participated in the students' sport
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 51
activities is a case in point. One might suppose that he took
part because he wanted to train his body, but that reason was
only part of the truth. What he wanted to do more than any-
thing else was to watch the students' delight in training (pos-
sibly because of unconscious homosexual leanings). It is
hardly surprising, however, that this gave him no satisfaction.
About that time he was for a short while a member of the
Society for the Social Sciences, but the group was apparently
not much to his liking. Weininger did not show any deep
interest in social or sociological problems, even though his
own concern was with the relation between man and woman,
and for a short period he dealt with problems in a field where
Feuerbach and Marx and Engels had tried building philo-
sophical systems on the basis of science. With his superficial
interest in these problems and the open contempt he later
felt for Feuerbach, Weininger certainly did not understand
Feuerbach's real achievement. That accomplishment lay in
bringing social problems to public attention at a time when
everything seemed to be in deadlock and in a world where
human life, the existence of religion, the word of God, and
the very form of government were accepted as fully known
facts which could not be changed.
It would seem that we can find only a single statement by
Weininger on social problems. In the light of his personality
this is not at all surprising. The ways and means to solve social
problems--if they could be solved at all--did not interest
him. Therefore, his one and only statement on social ques-
tions was founded on a moral base. He writes, "What is right
in socialism is that every man must find his own intrinsic
value, his own self, and then try to acquire property; and in
this he must not be checked from outside" (U. L. D. , p. 53).
Keen interest in psychological problems rather than in so-
cial problems is evinced also in his conversations with friends.
Though he never said much, he spent many evenings listening
to discussions of eternal human problems and the questions
of the day. In these debates he often returned to Beethoven,
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 52 Student and Genius
saying, "Nobody else could be as happy as he must have been
when he worked out his great themes" (Tascheribuch, p. 14).
The artistic side of Weininger's personality is most clearly
seen in his attitude toward music, for his early familiarity with
music did not lapse but greatly influenced his development.
As the thinker appeared in him, his appreciation of music was
more closely associated with his intellectual activity; every
melody gave him the sense of a psychic phenomenon (see
Der Fall, p. 10). Each gave him the feeling of a scene which
seemed to belong especially to that particular melody. He
could, therefore, talk of a theme on willpower, a theme on the
heartbeat, a theme having the chill of empty space. These vi-
sions were concerned not only with emotions and moods, but
also with supreme, general problems. As Rappaport said, "He
was most decidedly a music psychologist. " Discovering that he
was endowed with a special music fantasy, Otto later (on Au-
gust 12, 1902) arrived at the conviction that he was a born
musician. He combined tones with thoughts to form pictures
in his mind, so that a series of notes--the melody--actually
became symbolic to him. Therefore, those melodies which had
the strongest effect on him were those most closely related to
the make-up of his own personality. It is typical that he did
not care for Wagner at the time when his state of mind was
governed by empirical science. Then Wagner's music did not
fit into Weininger's world. But when he was metaphysical and
speculative in the later period of his life, he developed a ro-
mantic love for the operas of Wagner. He could then exclaim,
"Never has a piece of art succeeded in fascinating so com-
pletely and in fulfilling the artistic demands of all times as
have the works of Wagner! " (U. L. D. , p. 85). The same love,
though to a smaller degree, he felt for the music of Beethoven.
He respected Mozart, Bach, and Handel as, in his opinion, the
most religious of composers. He' considered a melody in
Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite the supreme height of genius (U. L. D. ,
p. viii).
One might have expected Weininger to use his deep artis-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 53
tic feeling as a means to penetrate into the objective world,
but instead he employed even these for discovering the depths
of his mind. In the Preface to Sex and Character, he wrote
(p. iv): "An artist who reproduces the female form can con-
struct the typical without actually giving proof by a series of
measurements. The artist does not despise experience; on the
contrary, he regards it as a duty to gain experience; but for
him it is merely a starting point for self-exploration, just as art
is a searching of the world. "
To Weininger, art meant losing oneself in the world, a prin-
ciple he apparently had first observed through examining him-
self. Experience became a steppingstone for his research work.
He wanted through his artistic intuition to go further than
scientific research could take him. And the result was the work
he completed during the next year and a half. Thus we can
see one important characteristic of Sex and Character: it is to
a certain extent epic, passionate, full of burning faith, but full
also of pain and sorrow for what he conceived to be evil in the
world.
His sensitive and artistic mind promoted in him poetic
traits which in turn fostered a deep concern with literature.
He and his friends discussed Ibsen, Strindberg, and Zola on
many nights, and he had something special to say about each
of them. "Otto Weininger looked on those personalities as
only a genius could look on them" (Taschenbuch, p. 14). His
interest centered not only on these writers, but also on their
countries. In particular he loved Norway and its artists, es-
pecially Ibsen and Hamsun, thinking Ibsen the greatest writer
of all time and undertaking later to write about him. Yet
even while he was indulging his interest in the problems of the
literary world, he still kept up his work on his main problem,
man and woman.
In the meantime, during the late summer and early fall of
1901, he tried to find a sponsor who would recommend his
thesis to a publisher. The effort was not successful, and later
Otto took great care to keep any account of it from reaching
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 54 Student and Genius
the public ear. It was only after some investigation that I ar-
rived at what he actually had done.
It may be recalled that Weininger's idea of bisexuality had
come to him through Sigmund Freud. The respect he had
for Freud was strange and mighty. What could have been
more natural than his going to Freud with his work?
The fact is that Otto Weininger did pay Freud a visit and
asked him to read his manuscript. Freud himself later wrote,
"It amazed me . . . that I could overlook the visit Wein-
inger paid me, but I have not forgotten it" (Kraus in Die
Wage, No. 43, October, 1906, p. 970).
To be quite sure how matters stood, I wrote to Freud, who
answered, "I was the first man to read through his manuscript
--and the first to give an unfavorable opinion of it" (Letter
IV). Swoboda reported: "If my memory serves me right it
must have been in the fall of 1901--I was not in Vienna at
the time--that Weininger went to Freud to ask his help in
finding a publisher. With the manuscript he also gave Freud
an essay on hysteria, which Freud did not like for several rea-
sons. First, he thought it was written ad captandam benevo-
lentiam; then, he criticized the method applied by Weininger
here and elsewhere, which, according to Freud, was too specu-
lative and too boldly deductive with regard to the scientific
treatment of the main subject. Talking about the deductive
method, Freud told Weininger that he acted like a robber in
a room of treasures--picking up what he could carry and de-
stroying the rest. . . . Freud told me that he never referred
to Weininger as stealing Fliess's property, but as a thief in the
scientific field" (Swoboda, Die Forschung, pp. 21-22). 5
How, then, did Freud react to Weininger's manuscript? It
should be noted that this manuscript was not Sex and Char-
acter, but Weininger's doctoral thesis. Accordingly, as Freud
wrote to me, "there were no depreciatory words about the
Jews and much less criticism of women. He had also to a
6 I have, however, received personal information from a reliable source that
the words Freud actually used were: "Sie haben das Schloss geoffnet mit einem
gestohlenem Schliissel. " (You have opened the lock with a stolen key. )
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 55
large extent given consideration to my views on hysteria" (Let-
ter XIII). Freud's unfavorable reaction was more clearly rep-
resented in a letter he later wrote to Fliess: "I cannot think
that the damage Weininger may have caused you can be any-
thing but slight, because a rotten book like Sex and Character
cannot be taken seriously. To steal is not so easy as Weininger
imagined it" (Die Wage, No. 43, October, 1906, p. 971).
Freud's low opinion of Weininger's manuscript did not,
however, reflect his view of Weininger personally. Apparently
the young man must have made quite an impression, since
Freud used the following words about him,. "A slender,
grown-up youth with grave features and a veiled, quite beauti-
ful look in his eyes; I could not help feeling that I stood
in front of a personality with a touch of the genius" (Der
Fall, p. 14).
Thus, Otto Weininger went to Freud with his thesis,
though neither in his books nor in his letters does he mention
that visit. Small wonder that this connection between Freud
and Otto Weininger escaped the notice of later biographers.
Otto's own stubborn silence is probably to be explained by
Freud's sharp criticism. What, then, was Weininger's reaction
to the meeting with Freud? We can only imagine that he
must have been shocked when he learned Freud's opinion,
but it would be wrong to believe that this shock would keep
him from trying to place his manuscript with a publisher. And
a little later he did so by sending it to Professor Friedrich
Jodl for his recommendation. The author still had faith in his
book.
At that time, however, something new developed. A change
in Weininger's ideas apparently started with his study of
ethical-philosophical subjects, into which he plunged with
feverish activity. He was led beyond the frame given in his
thesis. So spellbound was he that he spent his nights at his
work, a practice which disturbed his father. And since he did
not find sufficient quiet in his home, he moved and lived
alone (Letter XVIII).
In the course of these studies he made contact with new
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 56 Student and Genius
friends, among them Rappaport, to whom he later became
very close. Although it seems unlikely that Weininger's in-
terior change resulted from such external influence as these
friends exerted, nevertheless external factors of the sort may
very well have been instrumental in urging forward a develop-
ment which was already under way.
Something else that may have caused him to turn more to
ethics and may have also made his research methods more
deductive and speculative was his discovery that the principles
of science simply did not cover his theories. Unbiased, dis-
passionate science carried on through laboratory research did
not permit the conclusions Weininger wanted. The conse-
quence was, as he himself confirmed, that he arrived at the
theory that scientific research resulted not only in exploration
of physical reality, but also in the adoption of a utilitarian
view on human life. In Sex and Character (p. 179) he was to
say: "Scientists are not universal, because a science deals with
only one subject, or, at the most, with several. "
His mental change is also to be seen in his book Vber die
letzten Dinge, which shows a steady development of his per-
sonality going along step by step with his thesis. While he was
drawing up his thesis, his ego was growing and he became
more and more conscious of its superiority. It was in this
period, in his own opinion, that he made his real contribution
to psychobiological research. There was in him a continuing
growth, a mounting crescendo. His life seems to be a restless
process of continuation and condensation, which, as Ewald
says, "gave to every one of his statements a touch of religious
initiation, of clear apocalyptic growth" (Letter V).
His faith in himself continued to grow in spite of the tem-
porary defeat administered to his manuscript. This strong de-
velopment of his personality led him to the conviction that he
would have to live his life to the full and not take any half
measures, a decision which was in itself an incentive for him
to go beyond the limits of his earlier way of living.
Thus, a change of mind now takes place; leaving studies of
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 57
empirical scientific problems, he now begins to take an inter-
est in moral philosophy.
more than that word, for that was all I knew" (pp. 6-7).
2 It is beyond the scope of this book to judge between Weininger and Swoboda
on one side and Fliess on the other. Bisexuality, as a concept, seems to have
been defined as early as 1846, by A. Berthold, in his essay, "Geschlechtseigen-
tumlichkeiten" (Handworterbuch der Psychologie, Vol. I; see Swoboda, Die
Forschung, p. 8), so it would seem that neither Weininger nor Swoboda nor
Fliess had priority on the word. It is interesting to see what Freud himself wrote
in this connection: "As recently as 1906, W. Fliess (Der Abhuf des Lebens)
has claimed ownership of the idea of bisexuality (in the sense of double sex).
In uninformed circles assertion is made that the philosopher, O. Weininger,
is the authority for the human bisexuality conception since this idea is made
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 44 Student and Genius
given me the answer to this, too: "Weininger was never my pa-
tient, but one of his friends was. Through this means Weininger
became acquainted with the views on bisexuality which I had
already applied in my analysis, prompted by Fliess" (Letter
XIV).
This evidence is also supported by an article "Otto Wei-
ninger Plagiarist," written by Julius Kraus (in Die Wage, No.
43, October, 1906, p. 970). The article says that Fliess wrote
a book Vber den Ablauf des Lebens, which had just recently
been published. During the many years he worked on it, he
kept Freud informed about his progress. Professor Freud dis-
cussed the book with his friend and patient, Dr. Hermann
Swoboda in Vienna, who was an intimate friend of Otto
Weininger. In this way Weininger became familiar with the
ideas of Dr. Fliess.
This concept of bisexuality strongly affected Weininger's
sensitive mind. It became rooted in him; since it was men-
tioned to him when he was on his own for the first time, the
effect was unusually strong.
Such a phenomenon is often seen in people of a nature like
Weininger's. When a minor event registers in the mind of a
particular disposition, little significance may be attached to '
it in the beginning. Yet because of the particular mechanism of
the psychological reactions, the event, unimportant as it may
appear, eventually grows stronger in effect and may even be-
come the turning point of development. Thus, what Weininger
was told of bisexuality was destined to be of decisive impor-
tance in his life.
Bisexuality was not the original basis for his thesis. The
cursory sketches of this work which were read by Oskar Ewald
(pseudonym for Oskar Friedlander) were more concerned with
talent than with sex, and they were intended for use in an at-
tempt to obtain a scholarship. Further, Weininger's work was
the foundation of his rather hasty work," Geschlect und Charakter, 1903
(Freud, Basic Writings, ed. by A. A. Brill, Modern Library ed. , New York,
1938, p. 559).
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 45
not originally called Sex and Character but Eros and Psyche,
a title he later changed because of its literary coloring.
From the moment that Weininger became aware of the
problem of bisexuality, he began collecting his material. The
theory of bisexuality led him to believe that man and woman
were not separated distinctly from each other, but that there
was in every individual a mixture of masculine and feminine
substance (Sex and Character, pp. 9-10).
Thus, he reduced all differences between man and woman
to one single principle, the sex difference; but in doing so, he
placed more value on man than on woman; indeed as we shall
see later, he reduced woman's position in absurdum.
The dominating idea of bisexuality influenced him greatly.
This particular subject absorbed all his energy, and he worked
day and night to solve the sexual problem. "We spent many
a night together, often with other friends, discussing practically
everything he wanted to work out further. " 3 The work fasci-
nated him, and his absorption in it was increased by his study
of empiric criticism, a positivistic, pragmatic view at that time
predominant at the University of Vienna.
This viewpoint made Weininger at the beginning of his
university career an extreme antimetaphysicist. He became,
so to say, ametaphysical and was mainly occupied with us-
ing science in a broad sense to solve the problem of knowl-
edge. It was no coincidence that Kant's problem, "How is
experience possible? " had a deep influence on him. Like Kant,
he searched for the conditions of knowledge and for its proof,
sharing with him the opinion that the basis for knowledge was
a combination of empirical and rational material.
Weininger's was a positivistic view. As an intellectual with-
out any disposition toward metaphysics or mysticism, he at
this time subscribed to the words of Auguste Comte: Savoir
pour prevoir, peur pouvoir. Following the teachings of Pro-
tagoras and Hume, Weininger considered experience as the
* Emil Lucka, Otto Weininger: Der Mensch und sein Werk (Vienna, 1905).
Hereafter cited in the text simply as Lucka.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 46 Student and Genius
only foundation of knowledge. Along this trend of thought
he met empiric criticism. He was familiar with the doctrines
as early as 1899 and 1900, but he became better acquainted
with them after having been drawn into a group which in-
cluded his friend of later days, Emil Lucka. Lucka relates how
several young men who took an interest in the problem of
knowledge formed a small discussion group. "During 1901 we
got together once a week in the workshop belonging to the
father of one of the group. Guided by some trained men, we
read Richard Avenarius's Kritik der reinen Erfanning (Cri-
tique of Pure Experience). We were very serious about it;
we would often discuss one sentence for hours. "
Thus--in colorful reality--the young men got together in
the evenings and late into the night discussed the man whose
psychological and philosophical views were at this time a focal
point in philosophical circles in Vienna. It is not hard to guess
that Otto Weininger did not take much part in the discus-
sions. But let us hear what Lucka says of how he behaved: "He
was usually silent during the discussions, apparently making
his own observations. We went together most of the way home,
arid I found that our ideas concurred amazingly. Although I
was the older, he knew far more than I and told me much I did
not know. I asked him to come to see me, and we became good
friends in a very short while. We were equally interested in all
problems of psychology and philosophy, and agreed on most
points. However, when he found an observation on women I
had made in one of my earlier essays, we were in utter accord
with each other" (Lucka, p. 4).
There seems to be no doubt that the discussions in the group
made a deep impression upon Weininger's receptive and un-
prepared mind. Perhaps he at bottom was in discord with their
views; yet for the time being his own protests were overruled
by the group and he became a strong adherent to the theo-
retical and methodological principles of Avenarius. 4
* The influence of Avenarius is quite noticeable in Weininget's first scientific
researches. The principles of Avenarius's methods obviously were used as models
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 47
Weininger's studies became more "empirical," and he him-
self was now taking an eager interest in the natural sciences.
In the fall and winter of 1900 he worked feverishly at collect-
ing research data, and he arrived early in 1901, according to
his own statement, at the "Law of Sexual Attraction. " This
formulation was an important event to him. He seemed exceed-
ingly happy about his discovery and explained with great joy
the mathematical formula of his law to his good friend,
Swoboda, whom he met practically every day at that time. As
it later turned out, however, his joy did not endure, for he
then discovered that Schopenhauer had earlier found this same
law (Sex and Character, p. 489).
In any event, as his work fanned out, he started to deal with
the problem of homosexuality and the emancipation of
woman, but his studies still remained on the surface empirical.
During this period of intense activity he was incessantly
occupied. When he was at home he had dinner only two or
three times weekly, and sometimes he ate only bare necessi-
ties, not even his supper (see Der Fall, p. 8). In the summer of
1901, while he was staying in a little garden house in Piirkers-
dorf, near Vienna, he wrote down his ideas with terrific energy
and at a forced tempo. Lucka says (p. 75), "Otto Weininger
in a month assimilated as many books and thought inde-
pendently about as many matters as other talented men would
in the course of one or more years. " The manuscript, amount-
ing to 120 pages in all, was to be his doctor's thesis (see Swo-
boda, Die Forschung, p. 14).
He harmonized his style with his subject; therefore the writ-
ing is, by and large, quiet, although one can feel his blazing
spirit behind the apparently calm front. The reader has the
distinct impression that the author is working within limits
far too narrow for such an indomitable mind. On the surface,
when Weininger applied the same methods. Another basic similarity between
Avenarius and Weininger is the way they both start from a biological founda-
tion. One can also note the influence of Avenarius's terminology. The real
content of his general conception of experience is explained in his Der mensch-
liche Weltbegriff (Leipzig, 1891).
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 48 Student and Genius
however, everything was calm although there was disquiet
fermenting underneath, in a fermentation which was a warn-
ing of a mental change.
Because of his strong mental conflicts, Weininger was dis-
satisfied with life as early as the summer of 1900. With his
brooding and introverted make-up, he was probably very much
concerned with himself and with what he believed to be his
great mission.
The result of his feverish activity was that he overestimated
the importance of his work. "It was an investigation of prin-
ciple that he was making. It was pure law in practice that he
was studying. He was reducing the difference between man and
woman to one basic principle. " As his self-esteem grew, the
value of his work mounted in his eyes, and it became so im-
portant and took on such a large scale that all his surroundings
had to be included in it. As his work proceeded, it became more
and more a part of him. Even though his study--at least to a
certain degree--dealt with natural science, it still carried a per-
sonal touch, which became more and more pronounced until
finally the whole was only personal. Then Sex and Character
was a part of himself, involving his own life.
Thus, his writing at that time was partly built on empirical
facts and was instigated by his sense of reality. Intermingled
with them in a peculiar way were speculative, mystical ele-
ments which were closely related to his own fantasies and led
him to a distorted view. The question of sexual differences,
which should have been the starting point for his study, finally
became the goal instead. The idea of reducing all differences
between man and woman to one basic principle reflected his
daydreams, and he felt obliged to bring his concept of the sexual
problem into accord with his cosmic view. Gradually he be-
came more and more engrossed in his daydreams, and as he
tried to solve his life problems, a greater and greater distance
yawned between the reality which existed and the "reality"
he found in his own thoughts.
It seems quite certain that Otto Weininger sought to make
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 49
his spirit encompass all human problems, but the attitude itself
revealed his own defects. Ewald remarked rightly, "The power
of his influence was in the human impulse which accompanied
him and which expressed itself in all his shortcomings and all
his immaturity (he was just twenty! )" (Letter V).
The collection of material in the period from the fall of 1900
to the summer of 1901 was the external side of his activity.
But though there was considerable internal activity also, he did
not then give any sign of a mental change. The outsider could
see only that in his locked-up mind a great deal of introspec-
tion was going on. This gave him an air of secrecy. Strindberg
described him in a letter to Gerber as a "strange, mysterious
man. "
Secrecy went well with his striking appearance. "The slender
body was rigid and without any elasticity or grace. His move-
ments were abrupt and helpless, never impulsive. His lack of
grace was so much more remarkable when one noticed the
hesitating way his hand would grasp a thing and then sud-
denly take a hard grip on it. If his movements were hesitant
and weak, his grip was strong and hard, so that his hand was
no more a regular hand, but a fist. He dressed shabbily. His
way of walking was undecided, and he would often walk with
his chin resting on his chest. But sometimes he would race
along" (Taschenbuch, p. 6).
Gerber gives the following picture: "Nobody who had once
seen his face could ever forget it. The big dome of his fore-
head marked it. The face was peculiar looking because of the
large eyes; the look in them seemed to surround everything. In
spite of his youth, his face was not handsome: it was rather
ugly. Never did I see him laugh or smile. His face was always
dignified and serious. Only when he was outdoors in spring
did it seem to relax, and then become cheerful and bright. At
many concerts he would shine with happiness. In the most
wonderful moments we spent together, particularly when he
talked about an idea in which he was interested, his eyes were
filled with happiness. Otherwise his face was impenetrable.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 5?
Student and Genius
One could never, up to the last few months, find in his face
any hint of what was happening deep within his soul. The
taut muscles would often move, and sharp wrinkles would
appear on his face, as if they were caused by intolerable pain.
If asked for the reason, he controlled himself at once, gave a
vague or evasive answer, or talked about other matters, mak-
ing further questioning impossible. His manners would occa-
sionally elicit surprise, and often a smile. He cared little for
traditions and prejudices.
"The influence of his personality seemed strongest at night.
His body seemed to grow; there was something ghostlike in
his movements and there would be something demoniac in his
manner.
And when, as happened at times, his conversation
became passionate, when he made a movement in the air with
his stick or his umbrella as if he were fighting an invisible
ghost, one was always reminded of a person from the imag-
inary circles of E. Th. A. Hoffmann.
"I have often thought of one particular evening: we had
been wandering around the Votivkirche for a long time. He
had kept me company to my home, and then I went back
with him part of the way until, finally, after hours of walking
late at night, we were outside my home again. We shook
hands. Not a sound was heard except our own voices, not a
soul in the street except the two of us. He looked at me and
whistled. 'Have you ever thought of your own double? What
if he came now? Your double is the man who knows every-
thing about you, even that which nobody tells. ' Then he
turned around and disappeared" (Taschenbuch, pp. 6-8).
No matter what form his activities took, they were rooted
deep within himself. He was never able to run away from
himself, to enjoy wholeheartedly things that other people
liked. He seemed always compelled to have a reason for his
behavior, even if that reason were acceptable only to himself.
No wonder that his conduct not infrequently called forth
smiles from the fellow men around him.
His attitude when he participated in the students' sport
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 51
activities is a case in point. One might suppose that he took
part because he wanted to train his body, but that reason was
only part of the truth. What he wanted to do more than any-
thing else was to watch the students' delight in training (pos-
sibly because of unconscious homosexual leanings). It is
hardly surprising, however, that this gave him no satisfaction.
About that time he was for a short while a member of the
Society for the Social Sciences, but the group was apparently
not much to his liking. Weininger did not show any deep
interest in social or sociological problems, even though his
own concern was with the relation between man and woman,
and for a short period he dealt with problems in a field where
Feuerbach and Marx and Engels had tried building philo-
sophical systems on the basis of science. With his superficial
interest in these problems and the open contempt he later
felt for Feuerbach, Weininger certainly did not understand
Feuerbach's real achievement. That accomplishment lay in
bringing social problems to public attention at a time when
everything seemed to be in deadlock and in a world where
human life, the existence of religion, the word of God, and
the very form of government were accepted as fully known
facts which could not be changed.
It would seem that we can find only a single statement by
Weininger on social problems. In the light of his personality
this is not at all surprising. The ways and means to solve social
problems--if they could be solved at all--did not interest
him. Therefore, his one and only statement on social ques-
tions was founded on a moral base. He writes, "What is right
in socialism is that every man must find his own intrinsic
value, his own self, and then try to acquire property; and in
this he must not be checked from outside" (U. L. D. , p. 53).
Keen interest in psychological problems rather than in so-
cial problems is evinced also in his conversations with friends.
Though he never said much, he spent many evenings listening
to discussions of eternal human problems and the questions
of the day. In these debates he often returned to Beethoven,
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 52 Student and Genius
saying, "Nobody else could be as happy as he must have been
when he worked out his great themes" (Tascheribuch, p. 14).
The artistic side of Weininger's personality is most clearly
seen in his attitude toward music, for his early familiarity with
music did not lapse but greatly influenced his development.
As the thinker appeared in him, his appreciation of music was
more closely associated with his intellectual activity; every
melody gave him the sense of a psychic phenomenon (see
Der Fall, p. 10). Each gave him the feeling of a scene which
seemed to belong especially to that particular melody. He
could, therefore, talk of a theme on willpower, a theme on the
heartbeat, a theme having the chill of empty space. These vi-
sions were concerned not only with emotions and moods, but
also with supreme, general problems. As Rappaport said, "He
was most decidedly a music psychologist. " Discovering that he
was endowed with a special music fantasy, Otto later (on Au-
gust 12, 1902) arrived at the conviction that he was a born
musician. He combined tones with thoughts to form pictures
in his mind, so that a series of notes--the melody--actually
became symbolic to him. Therefore, those melodies which had
the strongest effect on him were those most closely related to
the make-up of his own personality. It is typical that he did
not care for Wagner at the time when his state of mind was
governed by empirical science. Then Wagner's music did not
fit into Weininger's world. But when he was metaphysical and
speculative in the later period of his life, he developed a ro-
mantic love for the operas of Wagner. He could then exclaim,
"Never has a piece of art succeeded in fascinating so com-
pletely and in fulfilling the artistic demands of all times as
have the works of Wagner! " (U. L. D. , p. 85). The same love,
though to a smaller degree, he felt for the music of Beethoven.
He respected Mozart, Bach, and Handel as, in his opinion, the
most religious of composers. He' considered a melody in
Grieg's Peer Gynt Suite the supreme height of genius (U. L. D. ,
p. viii).
One might have expected Weininger to use his deep artis-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 53
tic feeling as a means to penetrate into the objective world,
but instead he employed even these for discovering the depths
of his mind. In the Preface to Sex and Character, he wrote
(p. iv): "An artist who reproduces the female form can con-
struct the typical without actually giving proof by a series of
measurements. The artist does not despise experience; on the
contrary, he regards it as a duty to gain experience; but for
him it is merely a starting point for self-exploration, just as art
is a searching of the world. "
To Weininger, art meant losing oneself in the world, a prin-
ciple he apparently had first observed through examining him-
self. Experience became a steppingstone for his research work.
He wanted through his artistic intuition to go further than
scientific research could take him. And the result was the work
he completed during the next year and a half. Thus we can
see one important characteristic of Sex and Character: it is to
a certain extent epic, passionate, full of burning faith, but full
also of pain and sorrow for what he conceived to be evil in the
world.
His sensitive and artistic mind promoted in him poetic
traits which in turn fostered a deep concern with literature.
He and his friends discussed Ibsen, Strindberg, and Zola on
many nights, and he had something special to say about each
of them. "Otto Weininger looked on those personalities as
only a genius could look on them" (Taschenbuch, p. 14). His
interest centered not only on these writers, but also on their
countries. In particular he loved Norway and its artists, es-
pecially Ibsen and Hamsun, thinking Ibsen the greatest writer
of all time and undertaking later to write about him. Yet
even while he was indulging his interest in the problems of the
literary world, he still kept up his work on his main problem,
man and woman.
In the meantime, during the late summer and early fall of
1901, he tried to find a sponsor who would recommend his
thesis to a publisher. The effort was not successful, and later
Otto took great care to keep any account of it from reaching
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 54 Student and Genius
the public ear. It was only after some investigation that I ar-
rived at what he actually had done.
It may be recalled that Weininger's idea of bisexuality had
come to him through Sigmund Freud. The respect he had
for Freud was strange and mighty. What could have been
more natural than his going to Freud with his work?
The fact is that Otto Weininger did pay Freud a visit and
asked him to read his manuscript. Freud himself later wrote,
"It amazed me . . . that I could overlook the visit Wein-
inger paid me, but I have not forgotten it" (Kraus in Die
Wage, No. 43, October, 1906, p. 970).
To be quite sure how matters stood, I wrote to Freud, who
answered, "I was the first man to read through his manuscript
--and the first to give an unfavorable opinion of it" (Letter
IV). Swoboda reported: "If my memory serves me right it
must have been in the fall of 1901--I was not in Vienna at
the time--that Weininger went to Freud to ask his help in
finding a publisher. With the manuscript he also gave Freud
an essay on hysteria, which Freud did not like for several rea-
sons. First, he thought it was written ad captandam benevo-
lentiam; then, he criticized the method applied by Weininger
here and elsewhere, which, according to Freud, was too specu-
lative and too boldly deductive with regard to the scientific
treatment of the main subject. Talking about the deductive
method, Freud told Weininger that he acted like a robber in
a room of treasures--picking up what he could carry and de-
stroying the rest. . . . Freud told me that he never referred
to Weininger as stealing Fliess's property, but as a thief in the
scientific field" (Swoboda, Die Forschung, pp. 21-22). 5
How, then, did Freud react to Weininger's manuscript? It
should be noted that this manuscript was not Sex and Char-
acter, but Weininger's doctoral thesis. Accordingly, as Freud
wrote to me, "there were no depreciatory words about the
Jews and much less criticism of women. He had also to a
6 I have, however, received personal information from a reliable source that
the words Freud actually used were: "Sie haben das Schloss geoffnet mit einem
gestohlenem Schliissel. " (You have opened the lock with a stolen key. )
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 55
large extent given consideration to my views on hysteria" (Let-
ter XIII). Freud's unfavorable reaction was more clearly rep-
resented in a letter he later wrote to Fliess: "I cannot think
that the damage Weininger may have caused you can be any-
thing but slight, because a rotten book like Sex and Character
cannot be taken seriously. To steal is not so easy as Weininger
imagined it" (Die Wage, No. 43, October, 1906, p. 971).
Freud's low opinion of Weininger's manuscript did not,
however, reflect his view of Weininger personally. Apparently
the young man must have made quite an impression, since
Freud used the following words about him,. "A slender,
grown-up youth with grave features and a veiled, quite beauti-
ful look in his eyes; I could not help feeling that I stood
in front of a personality with a touch of the genius" (Der
Fall, p. 14).
Thus, Otto Weininger went to Freud with his thesis,
though neither in his books nor in his letters does he mention
that visit. Small wonder that this connection between Freud
and Otto Weininger escaped the notice of later biographers.
Otto's own stubborn silence is probably to be explained by
Freud's sharp criticism. What, then, was Weininger's reaction
to the meeting with Freud? We can only imagine that he
must have been shocked when he learned Freud's opinion,
but it would be wrong to believe that this shock would keep
him from trying to place his manuscript with a publisher. And
a little later he did so by sending it to Professor Friedrich
Jodl for his recommendation. The author still had faith in his
book.
At that time, however, something new developed. A change
in Weininger's ideas apparently started with his study of
ethical-philosophical subjects, into which he plunged with
feverish activity. He was led beyond the frame given in his
thesis. So spellbound was he that he spent his nights at his
work, a practice which disturbed his father. And since he did
not find sufficient quiet in his home, he moved and lived
alone (Letter XVIII).
In the course of these studies he made contact with new
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? 56 Student and Genius
friends, among them Rappaport, to whom he later became
very close. Although it seems unlikely that Weininger's in-
terior change resulted from such external influence as these
friends exerted, nevertheless external factors of the sort may
very well have been instrumental in urging forward a develop-
ment which was already under way.
Something else that may have caused him to turn more to
ethics and may have also made his research methods more
deductive and speculative was his discovery that the principles
of science simply did not cover his theories. Unbiased, dis-
passionate science carried on through laboratory research did
not permit the conclusions Weininger wanted. The conse-
quence was, as he himself confirmed, that he arrived at the
theory that scientific research resulted not only in exploration
of physical reality, but also in the adoption of a utilitarian
view on human life. In Sex and Character (p. 179) he was to
say: "Scientists are not universal, because a science deals with
only one subject, or, at the most, with several. "
His mental change is also to be seen in his book Vber die
letzten Dinge, which shows a steady development of his per-
sonality going along step by step with his thesis. While he was
drawing up his thesis, his ego was growing and he became
more and more conscious of its superiority. It was in this
period, in his own opinion, that he made his real contribution
to psychobiological research. There was in him a continuing
growth, a mounting crescendo. His life seems to be a restless
process of continuation and condensation, which, as Ewald
says, "gave to every one of his statements a touch of religious
initiation, of clear apocalyptic growth" (Letter V).
His faith in himself continued to grow in spite of the tem-
porary defeat administered to his manuscript. This strong de-
velopment of his personality led him to the conviction that he
would have to live his life to the full and not take any half
measures, a decision which was in itself an incentive for him
to go beyond the limits of his earlier way of living.
Thus, a change of mind now takes place; leaving studies of
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-08-19 08:38 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/wu. 89038364857 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? Student and Genius 57
empirical scientific problems, he now begins to take an inter-
est in moral philosophy.
