This brief published rejoinder addresses Dr. Bundsmann’s response to Schumpeter’s review. Its two paragraphs move from acknowledging an author’s interpretive authority to sharpening the original criticism.
Es ist das gute Recht, eines jeden Autors, sich selbst authentisch zu interpretieren!
English translation: It is every author's good right to interpret himself authentically!
Schumpeter distinguishes this right from the question of whether Bundsmann has actually refuted his objection. He leaves that judgment to readers of the Archiv willing to examine the dispute.
The second paragraph turns this apparent openness into a pointed reversal:
Trotzdem aber kann eine solche Nachprüfung leicht zuungunsten meiner Rezension ausfallen, denn der nachprüfende Leser hätte wohl ein Recht, mich darüber zur Rede zu stellen, wie ich ohne ein Wort des Tadels über den Gedankengang auf S. 19—25 hinweggehen konnte, dessen wesentlichen Elemente auch in der Erwiderung hervortreten.
English translation: Nevertheless such a re-examination may easily turn out to the disadvantage of my review, for the re-examining reader would surely have a right to call me to account as to how I could pass over without a word of censure the train of thought on pp. 19-25, whose essential elements come out in the reply as well.
The review might indeed deserve reproach—but for insufficient criticism. The rejoinder’s significance lies in this distinction between authorial self-interpretation and independent critical judgment. It identifies the disputed pages without restating their argument, leaving the substantive issue unresolved here.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian