Letter to Yu.A. Zhdanov, October 6, 1949

Letter to Yu.A. Zhdanov, October 6, 1949
Source: Tom 18

To Comrade Yu.A. Zhdanov

I received your letter about Academician Pavlov and his scientific legacy.

I am glad that you have taken up the cause of Academician Pavlov. I have no disagreements with you on any of the questions raised in your letter. Your assessment of the theory of the great Russian scientist, as well as your assessment of his opponents, is entirely correct.

In my view, the greatest harm to Academician Pavlov's teachings was done by Academician Orbeli. Pharisaically calling himself Pavlov's chief pupil, Orbeli did everything possible and impossible to undermine Pavlov through his qualifications and ambiguities, dishonest hushing up of Pavlov, and cowardly disguised attacks against him, to debunk Pavlov and slander him. The sooner Orbeli is exposed and the more thoroughly his monopoly is liquidated, the better.

Beritov and Shtern are not as dangerous, since they oppose Pavlov openly and thereby make it easier for science to deal with these amateurs of science.

The most faithful and intelligent follower of Pavlov should be considered Academician Bykov. True, he is, it seems, somewhat timid and does not like to "get into a fight." But he must be supported in every way and, if he has enough courage, things should be arranged so that he gets into the fight, explaining to him that without a general battle it is impossible to defend the great cause of Pavlov.

I agree with your conclusions and am even prepared to raise them to the third power.

Now a few words about the tactics of the struggle against the opponents of Academician Pavlov's theory. It is necessary first to gather Academician Pavlov's supporters quietly, organize them, distribute the roles, and only after that convene the very conference of physiologists of which you speak, at which the opponents must be given a general battle. Without this, the whole thing could be bungled. Remember: the opponent must be hit with certainty, with calculation for complete success.

It would be good to secure the support of Vavilov and other academicians. It would also be good to have the Minister of Health, Smirnov, on your side. About two weeks ago I had a conversation with Smirnov, and it seems to me that he will support this cause.

October 6, 1949.
Greetings (I. Stalin).

Zhdanov Yu.A. A Look into the Past. Pp. 279-280.

Note
A reply to a memorandum from Yu.A. Zhdanov:

"To Comrade I.V. Stalin.

These days throughout our country the centennial of the birth of Academician Pavlov is being widely observed. In articles and speeches much is being said about the significance of his great teaching. However, the question is being completely bypassed: is the Pavlovian legacy being developed correctly? The facts testify that there is a serious problem in this matter. About three hundred medical research institutions are to one degree or another engaged in physiology, yet the successes of medicine are more than modest; they clearly do not correspond to such an enormous expenditure of effort and resources. One of the reasons for this, as it seems to me, lies in the weak utilization of Pavlov's ideas, in a whole series of attempts to reject and refute his teaching.

I would ask you, Comrade Stalin, to familiarize yourself with my memorandum devoted to this important question."

The memorandum then examines the views of certain researchers who took anti-Pavlovian positions. First and foremost, the works of I. Beritov and L. Shtern were discussed. The position of Academician L.A. Orbeli, who, in developing the study of the vegetative nervous system and the sense organs, had departed from the fundamental problems of Pavlov in the area of higher nervous activity of animals, primates, and above all of man — his signal systems and neuropsychiatric clinic — was also subjected to criticism.

At present, Yu.A. Zhdanov asserted, the extremely important work begun by Pavlov on the higher nervous activity of anthropoid apes was not being conducted. In the Soviet Union there was currently only one anthropoid ape — the chimpanzee Paris, housed in the Moscow Zoo, while the chimpanzee herd of the American psychologist Yerkes, an opponent of Pavlov's teaching, had reached a hundred. As specialists indicated, it was not so difficult to acquire anthropoid apes, especially orangutans and gibbons.

In Yu.A. Zhdanov's opinion, the situation that had developed required the following measures for the development of Pavlov's teaching:

1. To subject to thorough criticism the attempts to revise or diminish Pavlov's teaching. To this end, to convene a conference of physiologists at which Pavlov's enemies would be routed. The report at such a conference could be delivered by Academician Bykov.

2. To spread Pavlov's teaching more broadly, making it above all the property of wide circles of medical workers. To revise university programs in the direction of strengthening the teaching of Pavlov's doctrine.

3. To link scientific work more closely with medical practice and first of all with neuropsychiatric clinical work. To intensify work on the physiology of speech.

4. To liquidate the monopolistic position of Academician Orbeli in leading physiological institutions.