Einstein and faith?

[Oeditpus Rex]

So I'm watching an episode of "Nova" about quantum physics, and it's talking about how Einstein maintained that all physical action was absolute and predictable, but when we began to understand quantum mechanics that theory sort of went down the tubes in deference to new theories that only probabilities could be predicted. A scientist on the show said Einstein disagreed and quoted him as saying, "God did not throw dice."

One of the most brilliant scientific minds in history, giving credence to a spiritual deity? Presented for your commentary.

(Edited to clarify source of quote.)

[KitchenWitch]

1. Personally I don't think believe in God and a committment to science

are mutually exclusive.

[Melodybe]

2. i think that science is a tool and religion is a crutch

until we find the answers of the universe.

However, I am a very spiritual person.

[KitchenWitch]

4. Interesting

I believe that religion and spirituality are two vastly different creatures. You can be religious and have zero spirituality.

[FreedomAngel82]

12. Yep

We talked about that yesterday at my church in the college class about how the two are different. Spirituality is more about what's in your heart/soul. Do you go to a religious service because it's something you have to do? Someone can be spiritual without a specific religious belief system I highly believe. If you're not going through the emotions then I don't think you're spiritual. I think being spiritual is an emotional bond with that which you believe in.

[TreasonousBastard]

19. Just came across a quote the other day...

forget who said it, but...

"Religion is for those who are afraid of Hell. Spirituality is for those of us who have been there."

(btw, did you get my PM about Quakers?)

[KitchenWitch]

32. Yes I did, it was very helpful

My son and I will be checking out the local Friends meeting as soon as he is done with fall baseball (games are on Sundays)

[DerekG]

22. True, but religiosity and spirituality need not be mutually exclusive

Gandhi, Dorothy Day, Thomas Merton, Rev. Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Pope John XXIII, the brothers Berrigan, Sen. George McGovern and Archbishops Oscar Romero and Desmund Tutu exemplify this (and I could list a hundred others). They were filled with the Spirit, but were (relatively) austere as well.

I say this only to present a counterbalance to the "I don't need religion; I have spirituality" proclamations I hear around campus. It doesn't have to be either/or.

[Oeditpus Rex]

7. Yeah, and I didn't mean to imply that they are

if indeed I did. The quote just puzzled me a bit. Would an Einstein have given "intelligent design" any credibility? If one did, should we pay attention?

:shrug: Nothing makes any sense anymore! :crazy:

[KitchenWitch]

15. War is peace!

:eyes:

[knowbody0]

3. Einstein also said

that "God" may have a boss.

[Journeyman]

5. A quote I'm quite unfamiliar with. . .

Do you have the Einstein's complete comment?

[Oeditpus Rex]

10. Nope. The scientist interviewed on "Nova"

just threw it out there. And I'm too dain-bread to go googling for it right now.

[Journeyman]

14. Thanks, anyway. . . .

I'll try to find it later, when I'm not so tired. If I find it I'll messagel it to you.

[Oeditpus Rex]

17. 'preciate that

:toast:

[Dogmudgeon]

6. One physicist said to Einstein, "Stop telling God what to do!"

Does anyone know who it was?

No, it's not a quiz. I used to know but I forgot.

--p!

[Az]

9. Bohr, it was a response to the dice quote

:D

[Oeditpus Rex]

11. Niels Bohr?

I would've loved to have heard guys like that argue. :popcorn:

[Dogmudgeon]

26. Thanks!

I half thought it might have possibly been Bohr, but the encroaching insanity has ruined my memory. :)

Anyway, here's another paraphrase of an Einstein quote I enjoy:
"Imagine that there is a cat with its tail in New York and its head in Los Angeles.
You pull on the tail, and the cat meows in Los Angeles.
Radio works the same way, only there is no cat."

What was it with physicists and cats, anyway?

--p!

[Az]

8. Metaphor. Here is Einstein on god

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.
-- Albert Einstein, 1954, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press

[depakid]

27. In other words, Einstein was a similar to a scientific pantheist

who held beliefs not unlike Spinoza's.

See: Subtle are Einstein's thoughts

Einstein's views on God are more complex than some of his most famous quotations might suggest. Alan H Batten looks at what the great physicist really thought about religion:

http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/9/2

[ismnotwasm]

13. I just don't think it matters

As long as science stays in the business of science, and faith stays in the business of faith. Keep 'em separated. Didn't Einstein also say "God is love"? As long as specific religions aren't being taught in public schools as the "correct" one who cares? As long as laws aren't passed based on biblical or other religious agendas who cares? Plenty of people of science believe in a Deity. Plenty don't. Quantum mechanics is cool and they know a bit more about it now than in Einstein's day. Steven Hawkings, who knows about a billion times more about it than I do, is an atheist from what I understand. (I could be wrong about that, I'm relying on a vague memory)

[Az]

16. It would be nice

Stephen J Gould argued that religion and science should by no means inpinge upon each other. The idea being that one peers at the universe and tries to understand its nature and the other attempts to deal with moral issues and those outside the normal pervue of science.

The trouble is twofold. Dogmatic Authoratative Religions base their claim of authority on the notion that they alone have the truth. To support these claims their doctrine may contain factors and claims that may collide with scientific discoveries (ie we are the center of the universe). If the Dogmatic Authoratative Religion admits to getting something wrong their facade begins to crack. Thus they may find themself threatened by science.

A second problem is that science does not presume what its inquiries may lead it to. As a result science has made inroads on matters that concern morality. Consider the ongoing understanding of the nature of homosexuality. Science seems to be showing us that its a neurological issue and not simply an immoral choice. Thus science is encroaching on even more territory that religion believes to own.

Dogmatic Authoratative Religion was at one time the virtual midwife to the birth of the scientific method. It believed it was right and science offered a way to discern the truth. Of course they would support such a thing. The truth could only support their claims. But things went wrong.

Religion and Science are going to clash. Science is concerned with finding the truth and (some) Religions are convinced they have the truth.

[TreasonousBastard]

23. All religions aren't dogmatic...

and it's easy to fall into the "God of the Gaps" fallacy when discussing religion and science.

Many of us believe that true spirituality is a constant seeking, not a specific set of beliefs. Many of us are scientists, and seek on both planes-- the physical and the spiritual. They are separate paths, but they do cross at times.

I imagine it's not easy to be an astrophysicist and think in terms of parsecs and colliding galaxies and then try to relate that to a simplistic, anthropomorphic, Earth-centered God.

Probably not too easy for a biologist to consider Intelligent Design with all of the bizarre critters out there, either. What would be the point in creating mosquitos or mole rats, anyway?

But, after you have all of the technical stuff covered, there is the nagging question-- "Why?" And some people just can't let that one go.

So, churches, temples, and mosques have their good measure of scientists and researchers who manage quite well to separate God and mammon.

[FM Arouet666]

18. A very old debate

One of the greatest minds in the field of science, a believer in god, how then, can lesser minds justify denial of god?

non sequitor

Science does not cease to function as humankind's most efficient means to explore and explain the natural world simply because one of its adherents was religious. Science does not have an hierarchy of clergy which determines doctrine.

To give weight to the argument that because Einstein believes in a god, a god exists is akin to the argument that because Einstein does not believe in the validity of quantum mechanics, quantum mechanic must not be valid. Both statements are incorrect, and belief in either statement demonstrates a fundamental lack of knowledge about science.

Your quote, and the debate regarding Einstein is an old one. But, since your into quotes. A single quote from a life time does not establish the essence of a man. Perhaps you missed this one, and I will not belabor the point with countless others.

"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.... 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 being."

From Skeptic vol. 5, no. 2, 1997, pp. 62ff.
Originally from a letter to Ens. Guy H. Raner, Jr

[Bernardo de La Paz]

21. Wrong. Einstein did not believe in a personal god.

[FM Arouet666]

24. I am curious, what prompted your reply to my post?

Does not seem to be consistent with what I wrote. Perhaps you were responding to the original thread, and mistakenly linked to me. I do agree with you nonetheless.

It is very late you know.......

[Bernardo de La Paz]

25. Your post's entire argument based on "Einstein believed in god". Wrong.

And 666 is just as nutty as "god".

[ClintonTyree]

30. I think you read the title of his post..........

but neglected to read the body of the post. It contains the complete explanation of the title. Read on.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

31. I read the whole post: "because Einstein believes in a god": Wrong.

Einstein did not believe in a god. The thesis is based on the idea that Einstein believed in god and the post does nothing to refute this untruth. It assumes he believed in a god and argues from that assumption. It then quotes some anonymous athiest.

If in fact the post is clarifying its title, it is poorly written. It should not state as "fact" that Einstein believed in god. It should identify the anonymous athiest.

[FM Arouet666]

35. I think there is a disconnect here.

You are missing the point.

First line, the old debate. If Einstein believed, why don't you believe. After all, he was a genius. Are you? I clearly indicate that this logic is flawed, non sequitor, and explain why. Whether Einstein was religious or not is irrelevant.

I then point out that all the evidence suggests that Einstein was in fact an atheist. The Quote is not some anonymous person, it is from a letter between Einstein and Guy H. Raner. This, I agree could have been more clearly stated, but you should have been able to pick up the attribution to Einstein from the text.

If not you could have entered the name in a browser and easily found this link.

http://www.ffrf.org/fttoday/2004/nov/raner.php

But, you did not. You briefly read the post, misunderstood, and hurled wild accusations. Have a nice day.

[FM Arouet666]

34. Hello, anyone there, HELLO

My argument is quite the opposite. As for "666" being nutty, I am not sure what you are inferring.

[ladylibertee]

20. I believe in God.I'm just not a psycho about it.

[Perky]

28. Every one is entitled to their opiniom...Here is mine...

Jesus Rocks!!!

[ClintonTyree]

29. People give the initial spark of life.......

many names. "God" just happens to be one of them. "The Big Bang" another. Just because someone uses the term "god" doesn't mean they're using it in the same context as the human invented "god" of the bible. People give things names that they chose, having chosen nothing.

[Katidid]

33. The World as I See It - an Essay by Einstein - died in 1955

"How strange is the lot of us mortals! Each of us is here for a brief sojourn; for what purpose he knows not, though he sometimes thinks he senses it. But without deeper reflection one knows from daily life that one exists for other people -- first of all for those upon whose smiles and well-being our own happiness is wholly dependent, and then for the many, unknown to us, to whose destinies we are bound by the ties of sympathy. A hundred times every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life are based on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still receiving...

"I have never looked upon ease and happiness as ends in themselves -- this critical basis I call the ideal of a pigsty. The ideals that have lighted my way, and time after time have given me new courage to face life cheerfully, have been Kindness, Beauty, and Truth. Without the sense of kinship with men of like mind, without the occupation with the objective world, the eternally unattainable in the field of art and scientific endeavors, life would have seemed empty to me. The trite objects of human efforts -- possessions, outward success, luxury -- have always seemed to me contemptible.

"My passionate sense of social justice and social responsibility has always contrasted oddly with my pronounced lack of need for direct contact with other human beings and human communities. I am truly a 'lone traveler' and have never belonged to my country, my home, my friends, or even my immediate family, with my whole heart; in the face of all these ties, I have never lost a sense of distance and a need for solitude..."

"My political ideal is democracy. Let every man be respected as an individual and no man idolized. It is an irony of fate that I myself have been the recipient of excessive admiration and reverence from my fellow-beings, through no fault, and no merit, of my own. The cause of this may well be the desire, unattainable for many, to understand the few ideas to which I have with my feeble powers attained through ceaseless struggle. I am quite aware that for any organization to reach its goals, one man must do the thinking and directing and generally bear the responsibility. But the led must not be coerced, they must be able to choose their leader. In my opinion, an autocratic system of coercion soon degenerates; force attracts men of low morality... The really valuable thing in the pageant of human life seems to me not the political state, but the creative, sentient individual, the personality; it alone creates the noble and the sublime, while the herd as such remains dull in thought and dull in feeling.

[bj2110]

36. And Newton saw science as a way to understand God. Science & religion

will forever be interrelated, as they are at the core, both methods for explaining the world around us.