Science and Religion

[DaMalakandGhar]

Becoming a Freethinker and a Scientist

When I was a fairly precocious young man I became thoroughly impressed with the futility of the hopes and strivings that chase most men restlessly through life. Moreover, I soon discovered the cruelty of that chase, which in those years was much more carefully covered up by hypocrisy and glittering words than is the case today. By the mere existence of his stomach everyone was condemned to participate in that chase. The stomach might well be satisfied by such participation, but not man insofar as he is a thinking and feeling being.

As the first way out there was religion, which is implanted into every child by way of the traditional education-machine. Thus I came - though the child of entirely irreligious (Jewish) parents - to a deep religiousness, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of twelve.

Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached the conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true. The consequence was a positively fanatic orgy of freethinking coupled with the impression that youth is intentionally being deceived by the state through lies; it was a crushing impression.

Mistrust of every kind of authority grew out of this experience, a skeptical attitude toward the convictions that were alive in any specific social environment — an attitude that has never again left me, even though, later on, it has been tempered by a better insight into the causal connections.

It is quite clear to me that the religious paradise of youth, which was thus lost, was a first attempt to free myself from the chains of the "merely personal," from an existence dominated by wishes, hopes, and primitive feelings. Out yonder there was this huge world, which exists independently of us human beings and which stands before us like a great, eternal riddle, at least partially accessible to our inspection and thinking.

The contemplation of this world beckoned as a liberation, and I soon noticed that many a man whom I had learned to esteem and to admire had found inner freedom and security in its pursuit. The mental grasp of this extra-personal world within the frame of our capabilities presented itself to my mind, half consciously, half unconsciously, as a supreme goal. Similarly motivated men of the present and of the past, as well as the insights they had achieved, were the friends who could not be lost.

The road to this paradise was not as comfortable and alluring as the road to the religious paradise; but it has shown itself reliable, and I have never regretted having chosen it.

http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/freethink.html

[DaMalakandGhar]

Prayer

A child in the sixth grade in a Sunday School in New York City, with the encouragement of her teacher, wrote to Einstein in Princeton on 19 January I936 asking him whether scientists pray, and if so what they pray for. Einstein replied as follows on 24 January 1936:

I have tried to respond to your question as simply as I could. Here is my answer. Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the actions of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a supernatural Being.

However, it must be admitted that our actual knowledge of these laws is only imperfect and fragmentary, so that, actually, the belief in the existence of basic all-embracing laws in Nature also rests on a sort of faith. All the same this faith has been largely justified so far by the success of scientific research. But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe — spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.

It is worth mentioning that this letter was written a decade after the advent of Heisenberg's principle of indeterminacy and the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics with its denial of strict determinism.

http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/prayer.html

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Prayer

A child in the sixth grade in a Sunday School in New York City, with the encouragement of her teacher, wrote to Einstein in Princeton on 19 January I936 asking him whether scientists pray, and if so what they pray for. Einstein replied as follows on 24 January 1936:

I have tried to respond to your question as simply as I could. Here is my answer. Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the actions of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a supernatural Being.

However, it must be admitted that our actual knowledge of these laws is only imperfect and fragmentary, so that, actually, the belief in the existence of basic all-embracing laws in Nature also rests on a sort of faith. All the same this faith has been largely justified so far by the success of scientific research. But, on the other hand, every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe — spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.

It is worth mentioning that this letter was written a decade after the advent of Heisenberg's principle of indeterminacy and the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics with its denial of strict determinism.

http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/prayer.html

Ahhhh yes, quote the man out of context in terms of ignoring the fact that this quote was much later in date, in his thought processes, and in his theological progression than yours:

"The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against traditional religion as the opium of the masses—cannot hear the music of the spheres."

replace fanatical atheist with ANP acolyte such as yourself. He understood fanatics like you are fighting other fanatics and making the world worse off. Oh wait... no you're not, you're using other people's children (the Americans and the British) to do so!

[DaMalakandGhar]

"Einstein used many labels to describe his religious views, including "agnostic"[3] "religious nonbeliever"[4] and a believer in "Spinoza's God."[5] He rejected other labels like "atheist" and "pantheist".[6]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein's_religious_views

[DaMalakandGhar]

For Mullah Barakzai Abdali Al-Akhwani Al-Arabiya.

"Einstein made many remarks expressing his skepticism regarding an anthropomorphic deity, often describing it as "naïve" and "childlike". He stated, "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem—the most important of all human problems."[7]


"On 22 March 1954 Einstein received a letter from J. Dispentiere, an Italian immigrant who had worked as an experimental machinist in New Jersey. Dispentiere had declared himself an atheist and was despaired by a news report which had cast Einstein as conventionally religious. Einstein replied on 24 March 1954:

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.[8]" "

In a letter to Beatrice Frohlich, 17 December 1952 Einstein stated, "The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naïve."[9] And to Eric Gutkind he wrote, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text."[10]

On 24 April 1929, Einstein cabled Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein in German: "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."[11]

On the question of an afterlife Einstein stated to a Baptist pastor, "I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it."[12] This sentiment was also expressed in Einstein's The World as I See It, stating: "I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the type of which we are conscious in ourselves. An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension, nor do I wish it otherwise; such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls. Enough for me the mystery of the eternity of life, and the inkling of the marvellous structure of reality, together with the single-hearted endeavour to comprehend a portion, be it never so tiny, of the reason that manifests itself in nature."[13]

Agnosticism and rejection of atheism

Einstein firmly rejected the label atheist, which he associated with certainty regarding God's nonexistence. Einstein stated: "I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being."[1] According to Prince Hubertus, Einstein said, "In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."[14]

Einstein had previously explored the belief that man could not understand the nature of God. In an interview published in 1930 in G. S. Viereck's book Glimpses of the Great, Einstein explained:

I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contribution to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and body as one, and not two separate things.[6]
In a 1950 letter to M. Berkowitz, Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."[15] Author Anthony Alioto has referred to Einstein as an "agnostic theist"[16] sometimes called a form of deism or panentheism.

According to biographer Walter Isaacson, Einstein was more inclined to denigrate disbelievers than the faithful.[17] "The fanatical atheists," Einstein said in correspondence, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'—cannot hear the music of the spheres."[17][18] Although he did not believe in a personal God, he indicated that he would never seek to combat such belief because "such a belief seems to me preferable to the lack of any transcendental outlook."[19]

In 1945 Guy Raner, Jr. wrote a letter to Einstein, asking him if it was true that a Jesuit priest had caused Einstein to convert from atheism. Einstein replied, "I have never talked to a Jesuit priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist. ... It is always misleading to use anthropomorphical concepts in dealing with things outside the human sphere—childish analogies. We have to admire in humility and beautiful harmony of the structure of this world—as far as we can grasp it. And that it all."[20]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein's_religious_views

[BarakzaiAbdali]

For Mullah Barakzai Abdali Al-Akhwani Al-Arabiya.

"Einstein made many remarks expressing his skepticism regarding an anthropomorphic deity, often describing it as "naïve" and "childlike". He stated, "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem—the most important of all human problems."[7]


"On 22 March 1954 Einstein received a letter from J. Dispentiere, an Italian immigrant who had worked as an experimental machinist in New Jersey. Dispentiere had declared himself an atheist and was despaired by a news report which had cast Einstein as conventionally religious. Einstein replied on 24 March 1954:

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.[8]" "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_...eligious_views

You are still missing his point when the sum total of his works are put together.

Einstein was not a secular fanatic bent on reshaping society. Mr. Dawkins is actually the latter and has garnered much ill will in the southern bastion of religion here in the states, causing many problems for the American educational system. We now have morons like this
Kirk Cameron's Dumbass Creationist Plot Against "Origin of Species" - YouTube[/URL]

who are having a reactionary phase and using Mr Dawkin's incessant and mind numbing near fanatic ferociousness to try and ensure that science is stripped out of textbooks in Kansas.

This idiot Dawkins went here to interview this American pastor who turned out to be a brazen homosexual drug addict:
Richard Dawkins Interviews Ted Haggard - YouTube[/URL]

And did it even dent his reputation? No it augmented it.

Einstein was a brilliant man who utilized common sense and understood that people find their own way and that you cannot Najibullaize society when it wants no part of what you are offering. He, unlike you and Dawkins, is like the respectable old grand-dad who chuckles when he hears the grandson talking about life's difficult matters (without being brazen or rash and telling the grandson that he is flat out wrong etc). He just sits back and listens and then provides honest but diplomatic guidance. If the grandson takes the guidance, so be it... if not... then so be it. He knows that for many his views are ideas beyond their ken.

You (and Soldat) on the other hand are a fanatic that is he-ll bent on ensuring that the West does not understand its adversary and the reasons for the ill will to ensure a clash of civilizations to complete your goals and ends.

[DaMalakandGhar]

You are still missing his point when the sum total of his works are put together.

Einstein was not a secular fanatic bent on reshaping society. Mr. Dawkins is actually the latter and has garnered much ill will in the southern bastion of religion here in the states, causing many problems for the American educational system. We now have morons like this
Kirk Cameron's Dumbass Creationist Plot Against "Origin of Species" - YouTube[/URL]

who are having a reactionary phase and using Mr Dawkin's incessant and mind numbing near fanatic ferociousness to try and ensure that science is stripped out of textbooks in Kansas.

This idiot Dawkins went here to interview this American pastor who turned out to be a brazen homosexual drug addict:
Richard Dawkins Interviews Ted Haggard - YouTube[/URL]

And did it even dent his reputation? No it augmented it.

Einstein was a brilliant man who utilized common sense and understood that people find their own way and that you cannot Najibullaize society when it wants no part of what you are offering. He, unlike you and Dawkins, is like the respectable old grand-dad who chuckles when he hears the grandson talking about life's difficult matters. He just sits back and listens and then provides honest but diplomatic guidance.

You (and Soldat) on the other hand are a fanatic that is he-ll bent on ensuring that the West does not understand its adversary and the reasons for the ill will to ensure a clash of civilizations to complete your goals and ends.

Mulla Barakzai Al-Arabi, the only inference one can make about Einstine is that he was an agnostic (out-worldly most likely) and didn't believe in a personal anthropomorphic God and considered morality and ethics to be a human domain.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Michio Kaku on God - YouTube

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Mulla Barakzai Al-Arabi, the only inference one can make about Einstine is that he was an agnostic (out-worldly most likely) and didn't believe in a personal anthropomorphic God and considered morality and ethics to be a human domain.

lol you're not getting it. Im not arguing about whether he believed in God or not... its about how he approached people who had not reached his status of whatever belief system he had.

Unlike your explicit goal of destroying the bedrock of belief, he had no such intentions IRRESPECTIVE of his belief system.

He was elegent about his views unlike the uncouth Dawkins who rides around in a bus harrassing people.

He understood the relevence of faith and belief in other people's lives and was not on a crusade to end it despite the fact that millions of his people were killed relative to their ethnicity and religion.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

But thats OK because that is how your party platform oriented mind works. For you there are categories that you pscyhologically split people into in order to develop relationships with them. Just as for you the Muslim has dar ul Islam and dar ul kufaar you too have dar ul ANP and dar ul MMA and dar ul Taliban and dar ul Afghan Mellat etc etc.
That is exactly why you have had such a hard time dealing with the white people that disagree with your viewpoint such as Ron Paul.
Your algorithm for splitting people falls apart there and you have created a new category for whitey called "naive"
Einstein was far far far above you my friend... please dont even try to ride his coat tails and make him an ANP ideologue.

[DaMalakandGhar]

-Bertrand Russel

p40
At the age of fourteen I became convinced that the fundamental principle of ethics should be the promotion of human happiness, and at first this appeared to me so self-evident that I supposed it must be the universal opinion.

p41
Until the age of eighteen I continued to believe in a Deist's God, because the First-Cause argument seemed to me irrefutable. Then in John Stuart Mill's Autobiography I found that James Mill had taught him the refutation of that argument-namely, that it gives no answer to the question "Who made God?"