Oppenheimer: Harvard's Gain

While the nationwide storm over Dr. J. Robert Oppenheimer seems largely to have subsided, a few students and alumni of the College evidently enjoy trying to thunder away in protest over the atomic scientist's recent appointment as William James Lecturer for next year. The protests would barely call for a reply--if they did not continue a regrettable defamation of a man who is by all standards loyal, deeply intelligent, and certainly qualified to lecture in philosophy and psychology.

Even the Atomic Energy Commission's special review board did not find Oppenheimer disloyal, although the board, by a 2-1 vote, recommended his discharge from Government employment as a security risk. The transcript of the hearings clearly shows that Oppenheimer did have close ties to Communist movements from 1939 to 1942, that he did tell the F.B.I. a "pure fabrication" in 1943, and that he did continue to associate with people he had known were Communists. The board, however, found "no evidence of disloyalty" in any of Oppenheimer's actions and added that "an alternative recommendation would be possible if we were allowed to exercise mature practical judgment without the rigid circumspection of regulations and criteria established for us." Clearly, Oppenheimer had proven his loyalty; only the requirements of the security system prevented his reinstatement.

While Oppenheimer's early background is hardly spotless, his subsequent leadership and loyalty in developing the atomic bomb--attested by scientist after scientist at the hearings--should outweigh any actions or associations that may conflict with rigid requirements of "national security."

The details of the hearings and Oppenheimer's proven loyalty, however, are not central to his appointment as William James Lecturer. His technical competence in the field of science, and his related interest in philosophy and psychology make him more than qualified to lecture here. His recent book, Science and the Common Understanding, shows that the scientist has a deep and uncommon understanding not only of science, but also of Man and Man's place in the world.

Now that a person of such wide learning is barred from Government service, he can make his greatest contribution to knowledge only in the universities. The Institute for Advanced Study, of course, has retained him as its head, and his lectures at the University of Oregon last year were described as "a fresh breeze blowing across the badlands." In a sense, the Government's loss is Harvard's gain, and the University can be glad that there are no unbending security regulations here to prohibit a series of lectures that should considerably enliven the Spring of 1957.