Critics may fail to appreciate the rhetorical significance of scientific texts that do not fit within the dominant genre of truth‐forming argument. Only by identifying Schrödinger's text as inspirational community‐forming discourse do we come to recognize the rhetorical artistry of his negotiation between two audiences, a negotiation that includes a subtle building of common ground, the application of productive ambiguity at a key point of collision, and a skillful _ reversal of language expectations to relocate audience loyalties.