This document discusses Einstein's views on religion and science. It suggests that Einstein held a pantheistic view of God, following Baruch Spinoza, seeing God as equivalent to the lawful harmony of the natural world. While Einstein admired Spinoza, he did not consider himself a strict pantheist. The document also examines Einstein's belief that a "cosmic religious feeling" is important for scientific discovery and his view that science and religion are interdependent but distinct fields.
Baruch Spinoza’s book promoting democracy as a system of government spread underground like wildfire throughout Europe while most governments were monarchies. Among Spinoza’s many seminal ideas were the foundations for Enlightenment thought, the first modern approach to Biblical interpretation, and a presage to psychoanalysis. A Dutch philosopher of Jewish parents, living in the 1600s soon after Galileo, Spinoza jump started the modern world. He was named Humanistic Jewish role model by the Society for Humanistic Judaism for 2009-2010.
This document summarizes Albert Einstein's views on religion and criticism of religion. It discusses how Einstein expressed both critical and positive views of religion at different times, making his overall position complex. On one hand, Einstein strongly criticized belief in a personal God and theism, arguing it contradicts the scientific worldview. However, he also emphasized the correspondence between science and a kind of "cosmic religiousness". The document aims to analyze Einstein's changing views and whether he ultimately supported or opposed religion.
Benedict de Spinoza was a 17th century philosopher who argued for substance monism, the view that only one substance exists in the universe, which he called either "God" or "Nature." In his major work Ethics, he uses a geometrical method of definitions, axioms, propositions, and proofs to develop this view. His substance monism holds that the one substance has an infinite number of attributes, including thought and extension, and all things in the world like humans, rocks, and plants are merely modes or modifications of this one substance. This view was highly controversial at the time for rejecting the traditional Judeo-Christian conception of a transcendent God.
The document discusses the similarities and differences between John Anderson's philosophy of situational realism and early Buddhist philosophy. It outlines the key aspects of Anderson's philosophy, including propositionality, situationality, plurality, causality, and empiricism. It then examines how early Buddhist teachings align with these concepts through ideas of Buddhist propositionality, situationality, plurality, causality, and empiricism. While the two share some similarities in their rejection of subjectivism and acceptance of empirical observation, the document notes there are also some major differences between Andersonianism and Buddhism.
This document summarizes philosophical approaches to understanding human existence according to Western philosophy. It discusses:
1) Greek philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle who saw reason and virtue as the highest human qualities and soul cultivation as the purpose of life.
2) Medieval philosophers like Augustine and Aquinas who viewed humans as having both rational and irrational elements and believed happiness came from union with God.
3) Modern philosophers like Descartes, who proposed "I think therefore I am" establishing the mind as distinct from the body, and Hobbes who saw humans as equal in a social contract with an absolute sovereign.
sushant shitole presentation b. spinoza.pptxShubhamRao59
Baruch Spinoza was a 17th century Dutch philosopher who developed a metaphysical system that viewed reality as a single substance with both mind and matter as attributes of God or Nature. He believed ideas correspond perfectly to reality similar to mathematics. Spinoza argued there is only one substance which is God or Nature, and all things in the natural universe are modifications of this single substance. His philosophy was considered radical for the time as he denied personality and consciousness to God, instead viewing God as an impersonal order of nature. Spinoza's works were published after his death due to fears of censorship during his life.
Augustine of Hippo was an early Christian theologian born in 354 AD in Tagaste, Algeria whose writings greatly influenced the development of Western Christianity and philosophy. He promoted the argument by analogy against solipsism and believed that time exists only in the human mind's perception of reality. Augustine tried to reconcile freewill and predestination in life. His most significant work was Confessions.
Maimonides was a preeminent medieval Spanish and Sephardic Jewish philosopher, astronomer, and physician born in 1135 in Córdoba, Spain. He is considered one of the most prolific and influential Jewish scholars. His major philosophical works included The Guide for the Perplexed and The Book of
Plotinus influenced both early Christian thinkers and later consolidation of Christian doctrine. His ideas of emanation from a single source and three primal hypostases inspired early Christian discussion groups and influenced the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. While the Gospel of John came to be favored during consolidation, the Gospel of Thomas also used Platonic concepts like the primal light in creation, but located this light internally rather than descending from heaven. Pseudo-Dionysius later systematized the idea of hierarchical emanations from the divine source, combining Platonic and Christian thought.
Baruch Spinoza’s book promoting democracy as a system of government spread underground like wildfire throughout Europe while most governments were monarchies. Among Spinoza’s many seminal ideas were the foundations for Enlightenment thought, the first modern approach to Biblical interpretation, and a presage to psychoanalysis. A Dutch philosopher of Jewish parents, living in the 1600s soon after Galileo, Spinoza jump started the modern world. He was named Humanistic Jewish role model by the Society for Humanistic Judaism for 2009-2010.
This document summarizes Albert Einstein's views on religion and criticism of religion. It discusses how Einstein expressed both critical and positive views of religion at different times, making his overall position complex. On one hand, Einstein strongly criticized belief in a personal God and theism, arguing it contradicts the scientific worldview. However, he also emphasized the correspondence between science and a kind of "cosmic religiousness". The document aims to analyze Einstein's changing views and whether he ultimately supported or opposed religion.
Benedict de Spinoza was a 17th century philosopher who argued for substance monism, the view that only one substance exists in the universe, which he called either "God" or "Nature." In his major work Ethics, he uses a geometrical method of definitions, axioms, propositions, and proofs to develop this view. His substance monism holds that the one substance has an infinite number of attributes, including thought and extension, and all things in the world like humans, rocks, and plants are merely modes or modifications of this one substance. This view was highly controversial at the time for rejecting the traditional Judeo-Christian conception of a transcendent God.
The document discusses the similarities and differences between John Anderson's philosophy of situational realism and early Buddhist philosophy. It outlines the key aspects of Anderson's philosophy, including propositionality, situationality, plurality, causality, and empiricism. It then examines how early Buddhist teachings align with these concepts through ideas of Buddhist propositionality, situationality, plurality, causality, and empiricism. While the two share some similarities in their rejection of subjectivism and acceptance of empirical observation, the document notes there are also some major differences between Andersonianism and Buddhism.
This document summarizes philosophical approaches to understanding human existence according to Western philosophy. It discusses:
1) Greek philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle who saw reason and virtue as the highest human qualities and soul cultivation as the purpose of life.
2) Medieval philosophers like Augustine and Aquinas who viewed humans as having both rational and irrational elements and believed happiness came from union with God.
3) Modern philosophers like Descartes, who proposed "I think therefore I am" establishing the mind as distinct from the body, and Hobbes who saw humans as equal in a social contract with an absolute sovereign.
sushant shitole presentation b. spinoza.pptxShubhamRao59
Baruch Spinoza was a 17th century Dutch philosopher who developed a metaphysical system that viewed reality as a single substance with both mind and matter as attributes of God or Nature. He believed ideas correspond perfectly to reality similar to mathematics. Spinoza argued there is only one substance which is God or Nature, and all things in the natural universe are modifications of this single substance. His philosophy was considered radical for the time as he denied personality and consciousness to God, instead viewing God as an impersonal order of nature. Spinoza's works were published after his death due to fears of censorship during his life.
Augustine of Hippo was an early Christian theologian born in 354 AD in Tagaste, Algeria whose writings greatly influenced the development of Western Christianity and philosophy. He promoted the argument by analogy against solipsism and believed that time exists only in the human mind's perception of reality. Augustine tried to reconcile freewill and predestination in life. His most significant work was Confessions.
Maimonides was a preeminent medieval Spanish and Sephardic Jewish philosopher, astronomer, and physician born in 1135 in Córdoba, Spain. He is considered one of the most prolific and influential Jewish scholars. His major philosophical works included The Guide for the Perplexed and The Book of
Plotinus influenced both early Christian thinkers and later consolidation of Christian doctrine. His ideas of emanation from a single source and three primal hypostases inspired early Christian discussion groups and influenced the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. While the Gospel of John came to be favored during consolidation, the Gospel of Thomas also used Platonic concepts like the primal light in creation, but located this light internally rather than descending from heaven. Pseudo-Dionysius later systematized the idea of hierarchical emanations from the divine source, combining Platonic and Christian thought.
The document provides background on Krishnamurti and his connection to the Theosophical Society. It discusses:
- The Theosophical Society, founded in 1875, which explored comparative religion and the idea of a universal brotherhood.
- Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeater's discovery of Krishnamurti in 1909 and their belief that he would serve as a vehicle for the predicted World Teacher.
- The Order of the Star in the East, formed in 1911 to prepare for the coming of the World Teacher, with Krishnamurti as its head.
St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas' Views about Self.pptxgrieferwild
St. Augustine was a prominent medieval philosopher and theologian born in 354 in North Africa. He was influenced by Plato and other philosophers and believed the self has an immortal soul distinct from the physical body. In his major work Confessions, Augustine describes how humankind is created in God's image and that true self-knowledge comes from knowing God. Thomas Aquinas was an influential 13th century Italian philosopher and theologian. He believed humans have both a material body and immaterial soul, and that the soul gives humans their identity and allows for intellectual and moral faculties. For Aquinas, the development of virtues is central to the flourishing of the self.
Idealism holds that ideas or mind are the ultimate reality. It emphasizes that knowledge is obtained through reasoning and speculation rather than observation alone. Several philosophers contributed to the development of idealism, including Plato, who believed knowledge comes from recollection of innate ideas, and Kant, who saw the mind as giving meaning to the world. Idealism views education as developing students' abilities and character to serve society by focusing on subjects of the mind through discussion and questioning.
This letter discusses Francis Bacon's involvement in translating and editing the King James Bible. It argues that Bacon played a key role in selecting translators and participating in the translation process. Additionally, it claims that Bacon encrypted secret messages into the Bible and that the King James Bible's style reflects Bacon's invention of Shakespearian English. The letter urges Christopher Hitchens to reconsider his high regard for the King James Bible and consider Francis Bacon's significant influence on the text.
H.P. Blavatsky addressed the question, What Is Theosophy, in a seminal article written in 1888, as well as in her other articles on Theosophy and her Theosophy books. She pointed out that the "Wisdom Religion" – also known in the ancient Sanskrit texts as the "Sanatana Dharma" – is as old as thinking man
This document provides background information on Ludwig Wittgenstein, a 20th century Austrian-British philosopher. It discusses his early influence on logical positivism and later work developing ordinary language philosophy. Wittgenstein focused on logical analysis of language and believed philosophy's task was to clarify thought and eliminate ambiguities in ordinary language. He was a religious man influenced by Christianity and St. Augustine. Leo Tolstoy's "The Gospel in Brief" also strongly influenced Wittgenstein and his view that ethics and religion cannot be discussed but only shown. The document examines parallels between Wittgenstein and Tolstoy's lives and the impact of "The Gospel in Brief" on Wittgenstein's later work.
The original teachings of Jesus Christ were an outcome of
Buddhism, says Holger Kersten, a German theology teacher.
Hence one of the titles of the chapters in his book, "The
Original Jesus" (sub-titled 'Buddhist sources of Christianity') is 'Jesus the Buddhist'!
The World As I See It …
"How I wish you have seen the creation the way The Old One has shown it to me …. though not am I deserving it, I am old sick; but the one who will be born after me in the 20th Century … will show & explain in a way the True Religion & Science Unification … defined …the correct formula of the Grand Unified [Field] Theory to explain all this unification of forces we can hardly imagine at present time … therefore, to construct as does the Old One want it to be… that peace for all mankind can be realized by collective efforts of humanity … only by understanding of the Mysterious … we have responsibility on Earth… the world we created is a product of our ways of thinking. It cannot be changed for good until we change our thinking. -
… I want to know how GOD created this world … I want to know His thought … ” Albert Einstein, April 18, 1955.
[History Notes: Albert Einstein (1879-1955): GOD’S “2nd Coming John The Baptist”: 1945-’52. Note: He squibbled above ‘notes’ in scratch paper in addition to a separate draft paper he was writing on “State of IsraeL”; his hands trembling late evening, April 17, 1955, on his bed @ Princeton Hospital, New Jersey, USA. Then he rested his head … the same did he quip in Gernan to Ms Alberta Rozsel, an attending nurse: 1:05AM, April 18, 1955; then, as Einstein tried to raise his head again off bed 1:07AM, Ms Rozsel, heard Einstein murmuring in German, as she raised Einstein’s head for comfort support, 1:10AM, till Einstein breathed heavily 2x & expired quietly; 1:15 AM, April 18, 1955. Sadly, several scattered papers on Einstein’s bed floor were unknowingly included in housekeeping clean-up the next succeeding hours @ 3AM. Pls see p.2]
I do not have a view on whether the Matrix scenario is possible, plausible, acceptable or disturbing. Speculative fictional scenarios can raise interesting philosophical questions, but determining their plausibility or implications would require rigorous analysis and evidence beyond what is presented in fiction. Philosophers have debated similar ideas, like Descartes' evil genius hypothesis and Leibniz' monadology, but the goal of philosophy is understanding through reason, not making unevidenced claims. Overall this seems like an imaginative thought experiment rather than a claim about reality that could or should be accepted or rejected.
STUDY OF RELIGION HANDOUT, PART I 1800-1900Prof. Daniel Alvar.docxpicklesvalery
STUDY OF RELIGION HANDOUT, PART I: 1800-1900
Prof. Daniel Alvarez, Florida International University
Bibliography and History: William Baird, History of New Testament Research: From Deism to Tubingen (Fortress, 1992); John Rogerson, Old Testament Criticism in the 19th Century (S.P.C.K, 1984).
Friedrich Schleiermacher (d. 1834). Major works: On Religion: Speeches to its Despisers among the Educated (1799, 3rd edition, 1821); Celebration of Christmas (1806); The Christian Faith (1821); Life of Jesus (published posthumously in the 1864); Introduction to the New Testament (1829-1832); and an influential work on Hermeneutics [Biblical interpretation], based on handwritten manuscripts (first published in 1838, but published in a critical edition without student notes in 1959). English translations of these works are in print, except for the Introduction to the New Testament.
One of the founders of the University of Berlin in 1810, preacher, classical scholar, whose translation of Plato’s Dialogues is the standard translation in Germany today. S. had close Jewish friends and was instrumental in the rise of Reform Judaism and Jewish emancipation. Otto von Bismarck, who in 1871 unified Germany, was S.’s catechumen as a young man. That in the same year that he became chancellor of a united Germany Jews were recognized as citizens with full civil rights might not be an accident (nor perhaps an accident either that Germany embarked on a path towards militarism and imperialism under Bismarck). Brought to Berlin W. M. L. de Wette (father of modern Old Testament criticism), Augustus Neander (father of modern church history, and famous for his dictum “the heart makes the theologian”), G. W. Friedrich Hegel (d. 1831), as well as E. W. Hengstenberg (d. 1866), the leader of German conservative theology from 1827 until his death. Influenced his young colleague, Friedrich Tholuck (d. 1877), specialist in Oriental languages, who became a conservative under the influence of E. W. Hengstenberg, but who in his early career believed Islam was superior to Christianity, and who wrote an important book on Sufism (Sufism, or the Pantheistic Philosophy of Persia [1821]) and a translation of Islamic mystical writings, Eastern Mysticism (1825). David F. Strauss (d. 1873) was his student at Berlin and was later to criticize severely S.’s Life of Jesus as seriously defective from a historical standpoint.
Scheliermacher is considered the father of Liberal theology. Although influenced by Kantian idealism, he shifts the essence of religion from dogma and revelation (orthodoxy) and ethics (Kant) to feeling. As he says elsewhere, religion is a matter of the heart, not the head, of the affections, not concepts (reminiscent of the theology of the American Puritan theologian, Jonathan Edwards [d. 1758]). He accepted the new historical criticism coming into its own in the 18th century, including the Kantian critique of religion that challenged the viability of the dogmatic and epis ...
THE PLATONIC AND NEOPLATONIC TRADITIONS AND ROOTS OF CHRISTIANITYDr Ian Ellis-Jones
Excerpts from a major thesis written by Dr Ian Ellis-Jones - copyright Ian Ellis-Jones - all rights reserved - for information only - commercial use (except by copyright holder) prohibited
This document discusses metamorphosis in early Christian imagination, specifically focusing on Jesus appearing in the form of an eagle. It provides several examples from early Christian texts where Jesus transforms into an eagle, sitting in a tree or appearing above a cross. The author argues that these ideas were influenced by Homeric literature, where gods like Apollo and Athena sometimes took the form of birds. Looking at evolutionary psychology, the author suggests that concepts of death and metamorphosis were appealing to early Christian minds. Overall, the document examines how the motif of Jesus transforming into an eagle emerged and what purposes it served in early Christian thought.
An introduction to Jesus for Unitarian Universalists, religious liberals, the spiritual but not religious, progressive Christians, skeptics, seekers, "Nones" and others.
2500 years ago, Athens was a well-known city in ancient Greece where a sloven person stopped people on the way to ask them strange and psychedelic questions. He used to ask people what is truth? What is morality? He not only used to ask questions but also used to incite people to ask questions. He thought people die after living a purposeless and meaningless life besides one-sided thinking. Do you know who this person was? This person was such a brilliant mind who laid down the foundation of philosophy in the West. This person was called Socrates.
What a heart-shattering event happened with Socrates? You will find it later in this post. You should have heard about the names of some great philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Marcus Aurelius, and the list is endless. But when we talk about their philosophies, people become afraid as they think it is difficult to understand them. People can't understand such deep and abstract conversations. Thus, people lose their courage, but you don't need to be afraid. Today, we will take you on a journey of knowledge, wisdom, and intellect that will blow your mind. There is so much learning in the post that you will enjoy. Today, we are going to meet the greatest philosophers in history. It will be a joy ride.
The document discusses the philosophy of Epicurus and Epicureanism. It provides background on Epicurus, including that he believed in attaining peace of mind (ataraxia) and not fearing death. It discusses several key aspects of Epicurean philosophy, such as removing anxiety as the path to happiness, not fearing gods or an afterlife, and finding pleasure in simple things. It also mentions how Epicureanism influenced other philosophers and societies through history.
Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was a French Jesuit priest and paleontologist who sought to synthesize science and religion. He believed that the universe was evolving toward greater complexity, consciousness, and unity, with humanity playing a key role. He coined terms like "noosphere" to describe a global consciousness formed by human thought. Though his ideas were controversial and criticized by both theologians and scientists, Teilhard saw the universe as physically and spiritually evolving toward an "Omega Point" of complete union with God.
This summary provides an overview of the key points from the document in 3 sentences:
This document discusses a debate between two Islamic philosophers, Al-Ghazali and Averroes. Al-Ghazali wrote "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" criticizing Aristotelian philosophy. Averroes responded with "The Incoherence of the Incoherence", defending Aristotelian philosophy by rejecting some of Avicenna's ideas and arguing that Al-Ghazali's objections do not apply to Aristotle properly understood. The document then provides context on these philosophers and examines passages from their works on topics like God's knowledge and the use of dialectic versus demonstration.
Excerpted from Beyond the Scientology Case: Towards a Better Definition of What Constitutes a Religion for Legal Purposes in Australia Having Regard to Salient Judicial Authorities from the United States of America as well as Important Non-Judicial Authorities, by Ian Ellis-Jones: PhD Thesis, Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney, 2007; [Online version] UTS Press Institutional Repository, <http: /> Copyright Ian Ellis-Jones 2012 All Rights Reserved
The Theosophists adapted and expanded on the classical Indian pancha kosa model of five sheaths or levels of existence. They described several planes of existence, including the physical, astral, mental, and nirvanic planes. Thoughts and feelings were believed to manifest as real vibrations and forms that could be observed on the astral and mental planes. This influenced modern artists like Kandinsky, who incorporated images from the Theosophist book Thought-Forms. The idea of the akashic record, a permanent record of all thoughts and actions stored in the ether, originated with the Theosophists based on ancient Hindu and Buddhist concepts. It was believed clairvoyants could read the
Essay On Teachers Day (2023) In English Short, Simple BestSandra Long
The document provides instructions for submitting a request to an online writing service called HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with a password and email. 2) Complete an order form with instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and select one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied with the work. The service promises original, high-quality content and refunds for plagiarized work.
10 Best Printable Handwriting Paper Template PDF For Free At PrintableeSandra Long
The document discusses differences between schools in America and India. It notes that American schools have earlier start times, later end times, and are divided into elementary, middle, and high school sections. American schools also place more emphasis on extracurricular activities and sports compared to Indian schools. Key differences include dress codes, lunch times, qualifications for teachers, and approaches to learning that are more hands-on in America versus memorization-focused in India.
Buy College Application Essay. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides instructions for requesting an assignment writing service from HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with valid email and password. 2) Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one based on qualifications. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment if satisfied. 5) Request revisions to ensure satisfaction, and the company offers refunds for plagiarized work.
The document provides background on Krishnamurti and his connection to the Theosophical Society. It discusses:
- The Theosophical Society, founded in 1875, which explored comparative religion and the idea of a universal brotherhood.
- Annie Besant and Charles Leadbeater's discovery of Krishnamurti in 1909 and their belief that he would serve as a vehicle for the predicted World Teacher.
- The Order of the Star in the East, formed in 1911 to prepare for the coming of the World Teacher, with Krishnamurti as its head.
St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas' Views about Self.pptxgrieferwild
St. Augustine was a prominent medieval philosopher and theologian born in 354 in North Africa. He was influenced by Plato and other philosophers and believed the self has an immortal soul distinct from the physical body. In his major work Confessions, Augustine describes how humankind is created in God's image and that true self-knowledge comes from knowing God. Thomas Aquinas was an influential 13th century Italian philosopher and theologian. He believed humans have both a material body and immaterial soul, and that the soul gives humans their identity and allows for intellectual and moral faculties. For Aquinas, the development of virtues is central to the flourishing of the self.
Idealism holds that ideas or mind are the ultimate reality. It emphasizes that knowledge is obtained through reasoning and speculation rather than observation alone. Several philosophers contributed to the development of idealism, including Plato, who believed knowledge comes from recollection of innate ideas, and Kant, who saw the mind as giving meaning to the world. Idealism views education as developing students' abilities and character to serve society by focusing on subjects of the mind through discussion and questioning.
This letter discusses Francis Bacon's involvement in translating and editing the King James Bible. It argues that Bacon played a key role in selecting translators and participating in the translation process. Additionally, it claims that Bacon encrypted secret messages into the Bible and that the King James Bible's style reflects Bacon's invention of Shakespearian English. The letter urges Christopher Hitchens to reconsider his high regard for the King James Bible and consider Francis Bacon's significant influence on the text.
H.P. Blavatsky addressed the question, What Is Theosophy, in a seminal article written in 1888, as well as in her other articles on Theosophy and her Theosophy books. She pointed out that the "Wisdom Religion" – also known in the ancient Sanskrit texts as the "Sanatana Dharma" – is as old as thinking man
This document provides background information on Ludwig Wittgenstein, a 20th century Austrian-British philosopher. It discusses his early influence on logical positivism and later work developing ordinary language philosophy. Wittgenstein focused on logical analysis of language and believed philosophy's task was to clarify thought and eliminate ambiguities in ordinary language. He was a religious man influenced by Christianity and St. Augustine. Leo Tolstoy's "The Gospel in Brief" also strongly influenced Wittgenstein and his view that ethics and religion cannot be discussed but only shown. The document examines parallels between Wittgenstein and Tolstoy's lives and the impact of "The Gospel in Brief" on Wittgenstein's later work.
The original teachings of Jesus Christ were an outcome of
Buddhism, says Holger Kersten, a German theology teacher.
Hence one of the titles of the chapters in his book, "The
Original Jesus" (sub-titled 'Buddhist sources of Christianity') is 'Jesus the Buddhist'!
The World As I See It …
"How I wish you have seen the creation the way The Old One has shown it to me …. though not am I deserving it, I am old sick; but the one who will be born after me in the 20th Century … will show & explain in a way the True Religion & Science Unification … defined …the correct formula of the Grand Unified [Field] Theory to explain all this unification of forces we can hardly imagine at present time … therefore, to construct as does the Old One want it to be… that peace for all mankind can be realized by collective efforts of humanity … only by understanding of the Mysterious … we have responsibility on Earth… the world we created is a product of our ways of thinking. It cannot be changed for good until we change our thinking. -
… I want to know how GOD created this world … I want to know His thought … ” Albert Einstein, April 18, 1955.
[History Notes: Albert Einstein (1879-1955): GOD’S “2nd Coming John The Baptist”: 1945-’52. Note: He squibbled above ‘notes’ in scratch paper in addition to a separate draft paper he was writing on “State of IsraeL”; his hands trembling late evening, April 17, 1955, on his bed @ Princeton Hospital, New Jersey, USA. Then he rested his head … the same did he quip in Gernan to Ms Alberta Rozsel, an attending nurse: 1:05AM, April 18, 1955; then, as Einstein tried to raise his head again off bed 1:07AM, Ms Rozsel, heard Einstein murmuring in German, as she raised Einstein’s head for comfort support, 1:10AM, till Einstein breathed heavily 2x & expired quietly; 1:15 AM, April 18, 1955. Sadly, several scattered papers on Einstein’s bed floor were unknowingly included in housekeeping clean-up the next succeeding hours @ 3AM. Pls see p.2]
I do not have a view on whether the Matrix scenario is possible, plausible, acceptable or disturbing. Speculative fictional scenarios can raise interesting philosophical questions, but determining their plausibility or implications would require rigorous analysis and evidence beyond what is presented in fiction. Philosophers have debated similar ideas, like Descartes' evil genius hypothesis and Leibniz' monadology, but the goal of philosophy is understanding through reason, not making unevidenced claims. Overall this seems like an imaginative thought experiment rather than a claim about reality that could or should be accepted or rejected.
STUDY OF RELIGION HANDOUT, PART I 1800-1900Prof. Daniel Alvar.docxpicklesvalery
STUDY OF RELIGION HANDOUT, PART I: 1800-1900
Prof. Daniel Alvarez, Florida International University
Bibliography and History: William Baird, History of New Testament Research: From Deism to Tubingen (Fortress, 1992); John Rogerson, Old Testament Criticism in the 19th Century (S.P.C.K, 1984).
Friedrich Schleiermacher (d. 1834). Major works: On Religion: Speeches to its Despisers among the Educated (1799, 3rd edition, 1821); Celebration of Christmas (1806); The Christian Faith (1821); Life of Jesus (published posthumously in the 1864); Introduction to the New Testament (1829-1832); and an influential work on Hermeneutics [Biblical interpretation], based on handwritten manuscripts (first published in 1838, but published in a critical edition without student notes in 1959). English translations of these works are in print, except for the Introduction to the New Testament.
One of the founders of the University of Berlin in 1810, preacher, classical scholar, whose translation of Plato’s Dialogues is the standard translation in Germany today. S. had close Jewish friends and was instrumental in the rise of Reform Judaism and Jewish emancipation. Otto von Bismarck, who in 1871 unified Germany, was S.’s catechumen as a young man. That in the same year that he became chancellor of a united Germany Jews were recognized as citizens with full civil rights might not be an accident (nor perhaps an accident either that Germany embarked on a path towards militarism and imperialism under Bismarck). Brought to Berlin W. M. L. de Wette (father of modern Old Testament criticism), Augustus Neander (father of modern church history, and famous for his dictum “the heart makes the theologian”), G. W. Friedrich Hegel (d. 1831), as well as E. W. Hengstenberg (d. 1866), the leader of German conservative theology from 1827 until his death. Influenced his young colleague, Friedrich Tholuck (d. 1877), specialist in Oriental languages, who became a conservative under the influence of E. W. Hengstenberg, but who in his early career believed Islam was superior to Christianity, and who wrote an important book on Sufism (Sufism, or the Pantheistic Philosophy of Persia [1821]) and a translation of Islamic mystical writings, Eastern Mysticism (1825). David F. Strauss (d. 1873) was his student at Berlin and was later to criticize severely S.’s Life of Jesus as seriously defective from a historical standpoint.
Scheliermacher is considered the father of Liberal theology. Although influenced by Kantian idealism, he shifts the essence of religion from dogma and revelation (orthodoxy) and ethics (Kant) to feeling. As he says elsewhere, religion is a matter of the heart, not the head, of the affections, not concepts (reminiscent of the theology of the American Puritan theologian, Jonathan Edwards [d. 1758]). He accepted the new historical criticism coming into its own in the 18th century, including the Kantian critique of religion that challenged the viability of the dogmatic and epis ...
THE PLATONIC AND NEOPLATONIC TRADITIONS AND ROOTS OF CHRISTIANITYDr Ian Ellis-Jones
Excerpts from a major thesis written by Dr Ian Ellis-Jones - copyright Ian Ellis-Jones - all rights reserved - for information only - commercial use (except by copyright holder) prohibited
This document discusses metamorphosis in early Christian imagination, specifically focusing on Jesus appearing in the form of an eagle. It provides several examples from early Christian texts where Jesus transforms into an eagle, sitting in a tree or appearing above a cross. The author argues that these ideas were influenced by Homeric literature, where gods like Apollo and Athena sometimes took the form of birds. Looking at evolutionary psychology, the author suggests that concepts of death and metamorphosis were appealing to early Christian minds. Overall, the document examines how the motif of Jesus transforming into an eagle emerged and what purposes it served in early Christian thought.
An introduction to Jesus for Unitarian Universalists, religious liberals, the spiritual but not religious, progressive Christians, skeptics, seekers, "Nones" and others.
2500 years ago, Athens was a well-known city in ancient Greece where a sloven person stopped people on the way to ask them strange and psychedelic questions. He used to ask people what is truth? What is morality? He not only used to ask questions but also used to incite people to ask questions. He thought people die after living a purposeless and meaningless life besides one-sided thinking. Do you know who this person was? This person was such a brilliant mind who laid down the foundation of philosophy in the West. This person was called Socrates.
What a heart-shattering event happened with Socrates? You will find it later in this post. You should have heard about the names of some great philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Marcus Aurelius, and the list is endless. But when we talk about their philosophies, people become afraid as they think it is difficult to understand them. People can't understand such deep and abstract conversations. Thus, people lose their courage, but you don't need to be afraid. Today, we will take you on a journey of knowledge, wisdom, and intellect that will blow your mind. There is so much learning in the post that you will enjoy. Today, we are going to meet the greatest philosophers in history. It will be a joy ride.
The document discusses the philosophy of Epicurus and Epicureanism. It provides background on Epicurus, including that he believed in attaining peace of mind (ataraxia) and not fearing death. It discusses several key aspects of Epicurean philosophy, such as removing anxiety as the path to happiness, not fearing gods or an afterlife, and finding pleasure in simple things. It also mentions how Epicureanism influenced other philosophers and societies through history.
Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was a French Jesuit priest and paleontologist who sought to synthesize science and religion. He believed that the universe was evolving toward greater complexity, consciousness, and unity, with humanity playing a key role. He coined terms like "noosphere" to describe a global consciousness formed by human thought. Though his ideas were controversial and criticized by both theologians and scientists, Teilhard saw the universe as physically and spiritually evolving toward an "Omega Point" of complete union with God.
This summary provides an overview of the key points from the document in 3 sentences:
This document discusses a debate between two Islamic philosophers, Al-Ghazali and Averroes. Al-Ghazali wrote "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" criticizing Aristotelian philosophy. Averroes responded with "The Incoherence of the Incoherence", defending Aristotelian philosophy by rejecting some of Avicenna's ideas and arguing that Al-Ghazali's objections do not apply to Aristotle properly understood. The document then provides context on these philosophers and examines passages from their works on topics like God's knowledge and the use of dialectic versus demonstration.
Excerpted from Beyond the Scientology Case: Towards a Better Definition of What Constitutes a Religion for Legal Purposes in Australia Having Regard to Salient Judicial Authorities from the United States of America as well as Important Non-Judicial Authorities, by Ian Ellis-Jones: PhD Thesis, Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney, 2007; [Online version] UTS Press Institutional Repository, <http: /> Copyright Ian Ellis-Jones 2012 All Rights Reserved
The Theosophists adapted and expanded on the classical Indian pancha kosa model of five sheaths or levels of existence. They described several planes of existence, including the physical, astral, mental, and nirvanic planes. Thoughts and feelings were believed to manifest as real vibrations and forms that could be observed on the astral and mental planes. This influenced modern artists like Kandinsky, who incorporated images from the Theosophist book Thought-Forms. The idea of the akashic record, a permanent record of all thoughts and actions stored in the ether, originated with the Theosophists based on ancient Hindu and Buddhist concepts. It was believed clairvoyants could read the
Similar a Albert Einstein Science Et Religion (19)
Essay On Teachers Day (2023) In English Short, Simple BestSandra Long
The document provides instructions for submitting a request to an online writing service called HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with a password and email. 2) Complete an order form with instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and select one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied with the work. The service promises original, high-quality content and refunds for plagiarized work.
10 Best Printable Handwriting Paper Template PDF For Free At PrintableeSandra Long
The document discusses differences between schools in America and India. It notes that American schools have earlier start times, later end times, and are divided into elementary, middle, and high school sections. American schools also place more emphasis on extracurricular activities and sports compared to Indian schools. Key differences include dress codes, lunch times, qualifications for teachers, and approaches to learning that are more hands-on in America versus memorization-focused in India.
Buy College Application Essay. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides instructions for requesting an assignment writing service from HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with valid email and password. 2) Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one based on qualifications. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment if satisfied. 5) Request revisions to ensure satisfaction, and the company offers refunds for plagiarized work.
FREE 6 Sample Informative Essay Templates In MS WordSandra Long
This document provides a summary of Ursula K. LeGuin's novel The Left Hand of Darkness. The story follows Genly Ai on a mission to persuade the nations of the planet Gethen, also called Winter, to join an intergalactic alliance. His journey is challenging due to major societal differences between Gethen and his home planet of Earth. One such difference is that the people of Gethen experience periods of sexual arousal and function during certain parts of their monthly cycle, which impacts their society and relationships. The document will discuss how sex and gender roles are portrayed in the novel.
Small Essay On Education. Small Essay On The EducSandra Long
The document provides instructions for using an online writing service called HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with an email and password. 2) Complete an order form with instructions, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied with the work. The service offers original, plagiarism-free content and multiple revisions.
Where Can I Buy A Persuasive Essay, Buy PerSandra Long
The document discusses a dermal fillers training course that fully trains and certifies students to administer dermal fillers, allowing them to add the procedure to their practice once completed. Students receive all necessary training on dermal fillers during the course. While certified after completion, students can also get follow up assistance from the instructor by sending in photos and questions about early cases.
Chinese Writing Practice Paper With Pinyin GoodnotSandra Long
Here are the key ways of knowing that would be relevant in this situation:
Empirical: The rising lactate level and increasing discomfort experienced by the patient provide empirical evidence that the chlorhexedine wipes are irritating her skin. Direct observation of physical signs and symptoms allows the nurse to gather empirical knowledge.
Personal: Communicating directly with the patient about her experience of burning and distress allows the nurse to understand her personal experience of the situation from her own perspective. This gives the nurse personally-derived knowledge.
Ethical: Considering the patient's best interests and right to be free from unnecessary distress or harm guides the nurse to stop using the irritating wipes. The ethical way of knowing emphasizes caring for the patient in
Elephant Story Writing Sample - Aus - Elephant WSandra Long
The document provides instructions for requesting writing assistance from HelpWriting.net in 5 steps:
1. Create an account with a password and email.
2. Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, deadline, and attach a sample work.
3. Review bids from writers and choose one based on qualifications.
4. Review the completed paper and authorize payment if satisfied. Free revisions are allowed.
5. Multiple revisions can be requested to ensure satisfaction. Plagiarized work will result in a full refund.
391505 Paragraph-Writ. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides information about a performance that will take the audience through centuries of musical innovation and revolution, from the Middle Ages to the Baroque period. It begins with a secular song by early troubadours, then discusses Machaut's secular ballades and virelais from the 14th century. Finally, it mentions an Italian soprano aria by Handel from the early 18th century Baroque period. The performance aims to showcase changes in vocal arrangements, instruments, mood and style over different historical periods of music.
Get Essay Writing Assignment Help Writing Assignments, Essay WritingSandra Long
This document provides instructions for getting essay writing assignment help from the website HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with an email and password. 2) Complete a form with assignment details. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions until satisfied. The document emphasizes that original, high-quality work is guaranteed, with refunds for plagiarism.
Ampad EZ Flag Writing Pad, LegalWide, 8 12 X 11, WhiSandra Long
The document discusses various methods for maintaining a healthy septic system, noting that certain cleaning agents and detergents can weaken or kill the bacteria that maintains the system. It recommends using liquid detergents labeled as safe for septic tanks, and provides tips for good laundry habits like avoiding bleach and antibacterial soaps. Combining these laundry best practices with regular septic system maintenance can help the system operate effectively for 20-30 years.
The Federalist Papers Writers Nozna.Net. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document summarizes an accounting software installation project that was going poorly after being well-planned initially. A task force from each company division provided input into the proposed installation and divisions were trained on how they would use the new software. However, four months into the project it was falling apart, with contractors complaining about delays caused by other contractors. The project manager called an emergency meeting to address the problems arising.
Whoever Said That Money CanT Buy Happiness, Simply DidnTSandra Long
The novel follows Cedric Jennings' journey from a dangerous neighborhood in Washington D.C. to attending an Ivy League university. To survive in his high school and pursue his dream of an Ivy education, Cedric isolates himself from his peers. When he reaches Brown University, Cedric still believes isolation is key to survival and sees himself in conflict with peers who have different values or successes. This leads to conflicts erupting from Cedric's refusal to socialize or celebrate achievements with others.
How To Write An Essay In College Odessa HowtowritSandra Long
The document discusses the steps to get writing help from the website HelpWriting.net, which include creating an account, submitting a request with instructions and deadline, and reviewing writer bids before choosing one and placing a deposit to start the assignment. It notes that customers can request revisions until satisfied with the final paper and receive a refund if the paper is plagiarized. The process aims to ensure customers' needs are fully met for original, high-quality content.
How To Write A Career Research Paper. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
This document provides instructions for creating an account and submitting an assignment request on the website HelpWriting.net. It outlines a 5-step process: 1) Create an account with a password and email. 2) Complete a form with assignment details, sources, and deadline. 3) Review bids from writers and choose one. 4) Review the completed paper and authorize payment. 5) Request revisions to ensure satisfaction, with a full refund option for plagiarized work. The purpose is to help students get high-quality assignment help and writing services from this online platform.
Columbia College Chicago Notable Alumni - INFOLEARNERSSandra Long
The Great Sphinx of Giza in Egypt is one of the most famous ancient monuments, but its origins remain mysterious. It is generally believed to have been built around 2500 BC as a statue of Pharaoh Khafre, but some details of its construction and purpose are uncertain. The Sphinx represents a guardian of the Giza plateau and holds symbolic meaning in ancient Egyptian culture. Recent archaeological excavations have uncovered additional clues, but the Sphinx continues to puzzle historians with the mysteries of its ancient construction and original function.
001 P1 Accounting Essay Thatsnotus. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides instructions for requesting writing assistance from HelpWriting.net in 5 steps:
1. Create an account with a password and email.
2. Complete a 10-minute order form providing instructions, sources, and deadline.
3. Choose a writer based on their bid, qualifications, and feedback to start the assignment.
4. Review the completed paper and authorize payment or request revisions.
5. Request multiple revisions to ensure satisfaction, and HelpWriting.net offers refunds for plagiarized work.
Essay Writing Tips That Will Make Col. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document discusses the materials needed for rockets and space shuttles. Early rockets were disposable to launch astronauts into space but were expensive. Later, space shuttles were designed to be reusable by having aircraft connect to rockets to boost them into space and land back on Earth. Engineers had to develop materials that could withstand extreme heat, cold, pressure changes and debris collisions in space while being reusable.
Pin On Essay Writer Box. Online assignment writing service.Sandra Long
The document provides an analysis of the memoir The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls. It discusses how Walls endured a difficult childhood, growing up in poverty with alcoholic parents who often neglected to properly care for their children. However, it argues that these hardships helped shape Walls into an independent, successful woman by teaching her self-reliance and resilience at a young age. While her upbringing exposed her to challenges that could have had negative long-term effects, Walls was able to overcome obstacles and achieve success despite coming from a low-income family environment.
How To Write A Funny Essay For College - AiSandra Long
The document discusses process improvement from a principal's perspective, noting that principals must assess delivery mechanisms, facilities, and equipment before making enhancement recommendations. It focuses on two learning delivery mechanisms, school facilities and technologies, and how process improvement relates to educational institutions. The principal is tasked with purposeful planning, preparation, and leadership to effectively evaluate an institution's success.
Gender and Mental Health - Counselling and Family Therapy Applications and In...PsychoTech Services
A proprietary approach developed by bringing together the best of learning theories from Psychology, design principles from the world of visualization, and pedagogical methods from over a decade of training experience, that enables you to: Learn better, faster!
Elevate Your Nonprofit's Online Presence_ A Guide to Effective SEO Strategies...TechSoup
Whether you're new to SEO or looking to refine your existing strategies, this webinar will provide you with actionable insights and practical tips to elevate your nonprofit's online presence.
THE SACRIFICE HOW PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS STUDENTS ARE SACRIFICING TO CHANGE T...indexPub
The recent surge in pro-Palestine student activism has prompted significant responses from universities, ranging from negotiations and divestment commitments to increased transparency about investments in companies supporting the war on Gaza. This activism has led to the cessation of student encampments but also highlighted the substantial sacrifices made by students, including academic disruptions and personal risks. The primary drivers of these protests are poor university administration, lack of transparency, and inadequate communication between officials and students. This study examines the profound emotional, psychological, and professional impacts on students engaged in pro-Palestine protests, focusing on Generation Z's (Gen-Z) activism dynamics. This paper explores the significant sacrifices made by these students and even the professors supporting the pro-Palestine movement, with a focus on recent global movements. Through an in-depth analysis of printed and electronic media, the study examines the impacts of these sacrifices on the academic and personal lives of those involved. The paper highlights examples from various universities, demonstrating student activism's long-term and short-term effects, including disciplinary actions, social backlash, and career implications. The researchers also explore the broader implications of student sacrifices. The findings reveal that these sacrifices are driven by a profound commitment to justice and human rights, and are influenced by the increasing availability of information, peer interactions, and personal convictions. The study also discusses the broader implications of this activism, comparing it to historical precedents and assessing its potential to influence policy and public opinion. The emotional and psychological toll on student activists is significant, but their sense of purpose and community support mitigates some of these challenges. However, the researchers call for acknowledging the broader Impact of these sacrifices on the future global movement of FreePalestine.
A Visual Guide to 1 Samuel | A Tale of Two HeartsSteve Thomason
These slides walk through the story of 1 Samuel. Samuel is the last judge of Israel. The people reject God and want a king. Saul is anointed as the first king, but he is not a good king. David, the shepherd boy is anointed and Saul is envious of him. David shows honor while Saul continues to self destruct.
Philippine Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) CurriculumMJDuyan
(𝐓𝐋𝐄 𝟏𝟎𝟎) (𝐋𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝟏)-𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐬
𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐏𝐏 𝐂𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐮𝐦 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬:
- Understand the goals and objectives of the Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan (EPP) curriculum, recognizing its importance in fostering practical life skills and values among students. Students will also be able to identify the key components and subjects covered, such as agriculture, home economics, industrial arts, and information and communication technology.
𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐜𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐧 𝐄𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐮𝐫:
-Define entrepreneurship, distinguishing it from general business activities by emphasizing its focus on innovation, risk-taking, and value creation. Students will describe the characteristics and traits of successful entrepreneurs, including their roles and responsibilities, and discuss the broader economic and social impacts of entrepreneurial activities on both local and global scales.
This presentation was provided by Racquel Jemison, Ph.D., Christina MacLaughlin, Ph.D., and Paulomi Majumder. Ph.D., all of the American Chemical Society, for the second session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session Two: 'Expanding Pathways to Publishing Careers,' was held June 13, 2024.
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptxDenish Jangid
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering
Syllabus
Chapter-1
Introduction to objective, scope and outcome the subject
Chapter 2
Introduction: Scope and Specialization of Civil Engineering, Role of civil Engineer in Society, Impact of infrastructural development on economy of country.
Chapter 3
Surveying: Object Principles & Types of Surveying; Site Plans, Plans & Maps; Scales & Unit of different Measurements.
Linear Measurements: Instruments used. Linear Measurement by Tape, Ranging out Survey Lines and overcoming Obstructions; Measurements on sloping ground; Tape corrections, conventional symbols. Angular Measurements: Instruments used; Introduction to Compass Surveying, Bearings and Longitude & Latitude of a Line, Introduction to total station.
Levelling: Instrument used Object of levelling, Methods of levelling in brief, and Contour maps.
Chapter 4
Buildings: Selection of site for Buildings, Layout of Building Plan, Types of buildings, Plinth area, carpet area, floor space index, Introduction to building byelaws, concept of sun light & ventilation. Components of Buildings & their functions, Basic concept of R.C.C., Introduction to types of foundation
Chapter 5
Transportation: Introduction to Transportation Engineering; Traffic and Road Safety: Types and Characteristics of Various Modes of Transportation; Various Road Traffic Signs, Causes of Accidents and Road Safety Measures.
Chapter 6
Environmental Engineering: Environmental Pollution, Environmental Acts and Regulations, Functional Concepts of Ecology, Basics of Species, Biodiversity, Ecosystem, Hydrological Cycle; Chemical Cycles: Carbon, Nitrogen & Phosphorus; Energy Flow in Ecosystems.
Water Pollution: Water Quality standards, Introduction to Treatment & Disposal of Waste Water. Reuse and Saving of Water, Rain Water Harvesting. Solid Waste Management: Classification of Solid Waste, Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Solid. Recycling of Solid Waste: Energy Recovery, Sanitary Landfill, On-Site Sanitation. Air & Noise Pollution: Primary and Secondary air pollutants, Harmful effects of Air Pollution, Control of Air Pollution. . Noise Pollution Harmful Effects of noise pollution, control of noise pollution, Global warming & Climate Change, Ozone depletion, Greenhouse effect
Text Books:
1. Palancharmy, Basic Civil Engineering, McGraw Hill publishers.
2. Satheesh Gopi, Basic Civil Engineering, Pearson Publishers.
3. Ketki Rangwala Dalal, Essentials of Civil Engineering, Charotar Publishing House.
4. BCP, Surveying volume 1
1. Original Paper UDC 2: 001/Einstein
Received April 18th, 2006
Marko Uršič
Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, Aškerčeva 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana
marko.ursic@guest.arnes.si
Einstein on Religion and Science
Abstract
the main issue of this paper is the question what Einstein actually meant from the philo-
sophical and/or theological point of view in his famous phrase God does not play dice.
What is the ‘underlying’concept of necessity in this phrase, and first of all: which God here
does not play dice – theistic, deistic, pantheistic? Some other passages from Einstein’s in-
formal writings and public speeches suggest that he was very close to pantheism, following
Spinoza, whom he admired and appreciated mostly among philosophers. However, Spino-
za’s pantheism implies determinism which was presumably not the main point of Einstein’s
protest against ‘dicing God’in quantum physics… So, is Einstein’s God nevertheless closer
to Newton’s Pantocrator as to Spinoza’s Deus sive natura? Maybe yes, but only in case if
the ‘Universal ruler’ does not punish, neither reward his creatures, ourselves, tiny human
beings in the mighty and incredibly ‘well-tuned’ cosmos. the enigma of the famous phrase
remains.
Key Words
God, playing dice, panteism, determinism, religion, science, Albert Einstein
For motto of my contribution in this conference at 100th anniversary of Ein-
stein’s Special Theory of Relativity, I have chosen a quotation from his fa-
mous essay the World As I See It (1930), which reveals very well Einstein’s
greatness, his modesty, compassion and human faith:
“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 I must exert
myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still receiving. […] 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.”1
In my reflections of Einstein-philosopher, who often pondered on the relation
between science and religion, considering his own scientific work as a kind of
religious devotion, as unveiling God’s “Design”, as scientific questing of the
ultimate Logos in Cosmos – in these reflections I am referring mainly to some
well known articles on religion, which Einstein wrote after 1930, motivated
also by several misunderstandings from the side many theologians and other
1
Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, Three
Rivers Press, New York 21982, pp. 8–9.
2. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
268
people, who estimated him an atheist. Einstein’s articles on religion were in-
cluded into two well-known collections, in the World As I See It (1949) and
Out of My later Days (1950), but here are quoted from a later edition, titled
Ideas and Opinions (1954); next to these articles I quote some passages from
Einstein’s letters, particularly to Max Born. As secondary literature, I refer
mainly to both Abraham Pais’ monographs about Einstein’s life and work
(Subtle is the lord, 1982, and Einstein lived Here, 1994), to Max Jammer’s
book Einstein and religion (1999), and to some recent articles of Gerald
Holton and Alan H. batten.
Einstein outlines in religion and Science (1930) three stages of religious de-
velopment in the history of mankind:
1. religion of fear;
2. social and moral religion (“God as Providence”);
3. “cosmic religious feeling” (die kosmische religiosität).
Einstein says that “with primitive man it is above all fear that evokes religious
notions – fear of hunger, wild beasts, sickness, death”, and that is why “the
human mind creates illusory beings more or less analogous to itself [… and]
tries to secure the favor of these beings by carrying out actions and by offering
sacrifices…”.2 According to Einstein, we can explain with human fear also
“the formation of a special priestly caste which sets itself up as a mediator
between the people and the beings they fear, and erects a hegemony on this
basis”.3
On the second stage:
“The desire for guidance, love and support prompts men to form the social or moral conception
of God. This is the God of Providence, who protects, disposes, rewards, and punishes, […] the
comforter in sorrow and unsatisfied longing; he who preserves the souls of the dead”4,
i. e., God as saviour (sotér), in Christianity incarnated in Jesus, Son of Man.
In other cultures, says Einstein, there are other gods of providence, yet their
common feature is the anthropomorphic conception.
The third and the highest stage of religious experience – which belongs partly,
but not in the pure form, already to the first and second stages – is the “cos-
mic religious feeling”, without any “anthropomorphic conception of God”.
The main features of this feeling are outlined in the following passage from
religion and Science:
“The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous
order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence
impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant
whole. […] The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious
feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man’s image; so that there can be
no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of
every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were
in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked
at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one
another.”5
For Einstein, in his religious quest, the key reference is Spinoza. We are not
far from truth if we consider Einstein as a modern, scientific and cosmo-
logical Spinozist, i. e., a pantheist whose religious attitude and feeling is die
kosmische religiosität. Spinoza was Einstein’s favorite philosopher, quoted
and mentioned by him many times in his writings, letters and conversations.
3. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
269
He even composed a poem, an ode to Spinoza’s Ethics (1920), which begins
with the verses:
How much do I love that noble man
More than I could tell with words
I fear though he’ll remain alone
With a holy halo of his own.6
Einstein declared his belief in Spinoza’s God (Deus sive natura) also in the
famous telegram which he sent in 1929 to New York’s rabbi Herbert S. Gold-
stein, who was worried by the Boston’s cardinal’s charge that Einstein’s the-
ory of relativity implies “the ghasty apparition of atheism”. Goldstein asked
Einstein: “Do you believe in God? Stop. Answer paid 50 words.” Einstein
answered Godstein in 25 German words, here in English:
i believe in spinoza’s god, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a god
who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind.
We may note here that Spinoza, strictly speaking, would not say that God “re-
veals” Himself (or Itself) in…, but that God actually is the same as “the lawful
harmony of the world”. This is namely the strict pantheist position, so we may
assume from Einstein’s telegram that he was not quite a strict pantheist. Max
Jammer quotes an Einstein’s answer, when he was asked to define God:
“I’am not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist.”7
Then he speaks about his belief in the laws of the marvelously ordered uni-
verse, which give evidence of the divine Creator. However, Einstein was
surely a pantheist in some broader sense; at another occasion, speaking of the
superior Mind that reveals itself in the world, he maintained that “in common
parlance this may be described as ‘pantheistic’(belief) in Spinoza’s (sense)”.8
Jammer understands Einstein’s ‘pantheistic’ attitude in the following way:
“Einstein agreed with Spinoza that he who knows Nature knows God, but not because Nature is
God but because the pursuit of science in studying Nature leads to religion.”9
Well, this could be said of some theist as well, so let us suspend a definite
conclusion at the moment.
As Gerard Holton correctly points out, the main Einstein’s motive and the
principal methodological maxime in his quest of the “third paradise”, i. e., of
the union of his first and second “paradises”, religion and science respectively,
2
A. Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, pp. 36–37.
3
Ibid., p. 37.
4
Ibid.
5
Ibid., p. 38.
6
See: Max Jammer, Einstein and religion,
Princeton University Press, Princeton 1999,
p. 43; in the Appendix of this book we find
the whole poem in the original German; here
we quote just the first strophe:
Wie lieb ich diesen edlen Mann
Mehr als ich mit Worten sagen kann.
Doch fuercht’ich, dass er bleibt allein
Mit seinem strahlenden Heiligenschein.
7
M. Jammer, Einstein and religion, p. 48.
8
Ibid., p. 75.
9
Ibid., p. 148.
4. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
270
was die Einheitlichkeit, the supreme Unity of all phenomena.10 This was, of
course, also the basic idea behind Einstein’s “Principle of Relativity” and the
later “Principle of General Covariance”. We know from his biographies that
Einstein was not content with associations which his expression “Principle of
Relativity” (or “Theory of Relativity”) had provoked, so he would prefer that
his theory was named die Invariantentheorie (Theory of Invariance), follow-
ing Felix Klein’s term, but it was already too late to rename it.
Soon after the publication of his famous “field equations” of the General The-
ory of Relativity (GTR), Einstein wrote to Willem de Sitter (1916):
“I am driven by my need to generalize (mein Verall-gemeinerung-bedürfnis; the word is written
in the original German without hyphens!).”11
This need to generalize is principal for all Einstein’s scientific search and for
his philosophical world-view. The quest for die Einheitlichkeit is the basic
motive also for his later endeavors to formulate the “Unified Field Theory”
(UFT), which would unite gravity and electromagnetism. Einstein was not
successful in his final search, however, he was indeed a visionary, since the
quest for a unified theory has become the “Holy Grail” of modern physics.
Nowadays, the search of unification of all four basic forces in nature (gra-
vity, electomagnetic force, weak and strong nuclear force) is going on other
lines, following mainly quantum theories. The best candidate for the “Final
Theory”,12 which would unite microcosmos (quantum forces) and macrocos-
mos (gravity), is supposed to be some “string theory” (there is a set of diffe-
rent string theories): very tiny “strings”, which vibrate in many dimensions,
are introduced to replace particles, in order to resolve the incompatibility
between quantum mechanics (QM) and (GTR). Ways are different, but the
main motive for this unification is still the same as Einstein’s: the quest of
die Einheitlichkeit of physics, and consequently of the whole natural sci-
ence. We may say that Einstein’s epistemological ideal was such a theory of
nature, which would not only connect (GRT) and (QM), but also resolve all
contingencies (presumably also constants in presently known physical equa-
tions) into lawful necessities. This would be indeed the final Theory (T), the
“Universal Equation”.
Spinoza’s Ethica, ordine geometrico demonstrata was for Einstein the highest
ideal of unity of philosophy and religion, of reason and faith, based on neces-
sity, culminating in Spinoza’s amor dei intellectualis. From this philosophical
and scientific belief we can also understand Einstein’s famous dictum (1941),
a paraphrase of Kant:
“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”13
or a similar thought in Einstein’s earlier paper (1930):
“I maintain that the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific
research. […] What a deep conviction of the rationality of the universe and what a yearning to
understand, were it but a feeble reflection of the mind revealed in this world, Kepler and Newton
must have had to enable them to spend years of solitary labor in disentangling the principles of
celestial mechanics!”14
But here we have to add something essential: yes, Kepler had indeed very
deep conviction in the rationality of the universe, since without this convic-
tion he could not formulate the laws of planetary motions – however, his
Platonic metaphysical beliefs were almost too deep for a break-through in sci-
ence, when he tried in his early work Mysterium cosmographicum (1597) to
explain the orbits of planets with five Platonic “ideal geometrical bodies”; so
5. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
271
his later scientific success was the result of having abandoned the “ideal cir-
cles” in favor of empirically founded ellipses. (Of course this does not mean
that Platonism is a wrong philosophical basis for scientific investigations – on
the contrary: I am inclined to think that Platonism in some “refined” sense is
the ultimate ground of scientific laws and the best foundation of the scientific
quest of truth.)
Comparing Kepler with Newton, we may say that the latter’s belief in the
rationality of the universe is more independent of his religious feelings and
reflections as former’s. True, Newton’s pantocrator, Universal Ruler, “God
of a working day” (if we use Alexandre Koyré’s term), is always and every-
where present “behind” or even “in” nature, since space is His sensorium, yet
Newton’s God is practically absent in the physical calculus of the “celestial
mechanics”: from the scientific point of view, circles and ellipses are equally
right, the only thing which matters in modern science is the consistency of the
mathematical system and its adequacy for the description of physical facts;
the world “outside” is supposed to be ontologically real, objective, however,
its reality is not a matter of science, but of philosophy and/or theology.
Anyway, Einstein was probably right, when he said that some “religious feeling”
(whether pantheistic or theistic or deistic) is needed for great achievements in
science, especially in cosmology, but on the other hand we must not overlook
that such “religious” attitude in science is, from the methodological point of
view, actually a deviation from the conception of modern science, let us say
from the “Galilean science”, which is based only on empirical facts and mathe-
matical tools. So we may say that Niels Bohr with his “Copenhagen inter-
pretation” of (Qm) was in some deeper philosophical sense a closer follower
of Galilean “antirealism”, compared with Einstein’s “realism” concerning the
equations of (GTR) – namely, Bohr argued that science has to limit itself to
phenomena, and he defined the word phenomenon as referring “exclusively
to observations under specified circumstances, including an account of the
whole experiment”;15 of course, considering the second part of the quoted
phrase, which is a variant of the “Complementarity Principle” (Bohr, 1928),
the method of (QM) differs very much from the Galilean science. For Einstein,
this new “phenomenological” attitude in science was unacceptable, since it
ignores the “objective reality”. And the reality is for him in some fundamental
way connected with his religious feeling of God who does not “play dice”.
Now, there are two main problems (among others) of pantheism – problems,
which are radically solved in the “pure” pantheism of Spinoza, but which
remain problems in Einstein’s pantheistic “cosmic religion”:
10
Gerald Holton, “Einstein’s Third Paradise”,
Daedalus, Fall 2003, from Internet.
11
G. Holton, “Einstein’s Third Paradise”.
12
The term “Final Theory” is known from Ste-
ven Weinberg’s popular book Dreams of a
Final theory: the Scientist’s Search for the
Ultimate laws of Nature, Random House
Inc., London 1994. Weinberg hopes that such
a Theory is possible, at least in principle.
Stephen Hawking uses the term “Theory of
Everything” (TOE) for the Theory which is
supposed to explain “the origin and fate of the
universe” and link together all known physi-
cal phenomena; however, (TOE) is usually
meant in a more specific sense, namely as
a theory that would unify four fundamental
physical forces (or interactions).
13
A. Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 46.
14
Ibid., p. 39.
15
Niels Bohr, quoted from: Abraham Pais,
Subtle is the lord, Oxford University Press,
Oxford 1982, p. 455.
6. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
272
I. Does Einstein’s “cosmic religion” necessarily imply the negation of God
as Person?
II. What has Einstein really meant with determinism?
In the following, I discuss these two questions, which are mutually connect-
ed.
Ad I.: Einstein’s open critique of the “personal God” of Christianity and Juda-
ism is present in the second part of his essay Science and religion, which he
presented in the “Conference on Science, Philosophy, and Religion”, held at
the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, in New York, 1940, and which
was published the same year in the famous journal Nature (№ 146), and it is,
incidentally, the only Einstein’s paper on religion, published in a scientific
journal; a year later this text was included into the proceedings of this sympo-
sium (1941).16 Let us see some passages:
“It seems to me that what is important is the force of the superpersonal content and the depth of
the conviction concerning its overpowering meaningfulness, regardless of whether any attempt
is made to unite this content with a divine Being, for otherwise it would not be possible to count
buddha and Spinoza as religious personalities.”17
The phrase “superpersonal content” refers both to human superpersonal (or
superindividual) attitude towards God and also to God’s own superpersonal
nature. Then Einstein goes on with his reflection on religion and science:
“… a conflict [between religion and science] arises when a religious community insists on the
absolute truthfulness of all statements recorded in the bible. This means an intervention on the
part of religion into the sphere of science; this is where the struggle of the Church against the
doctrines of Galileo and Darwin belongs. On the other hand, representatives of science have
often made an attempt to arrive at fundamental judgments with respect to values and ends on the
basis of scientific method, and in this way have set themselves in opposition to religion. These
conflicts have all sprung from fatal errors.”18
This strategy of distinction between religious (“moral”) and scientific level of
discourse has been known from Middle Ages on, from Abelard and Ockham,
to Copernicus and Bruno, Galileo and Spinoza, up to Hume and Kant. Ein-
stein’s specific point in this ancient dispute between science and philosophy
on the one side and religion or theology on the other is his insisting – which
is not present in such sharpness neither in Spinoza – that the main source of
trouble is the theistic concept of a “personal God”, with whom man can have
personal relations (in prayer, rituals etc.). It is interesting that Einstein insists
that the “anthropomorphic character” of the “personal God” is even nowadays
(i. e., in 20th century) the heaviest obstacle for collaboration between the es-
tablished religion(s) and science(s):
“The idea of God in the religions taught at present is a sublimation of that old concept of the
gods. Its anthropomorphic character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men appeal to the
Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of their wishes. […] The main source of
the present-day conflicts between the spheres of religion and of science lies in this concept of
a personal God.”19
We may ask: why? What is wrong with the “personal God” in relation to sci-
ence? Einstein is convinced that every personal God must have a free will,
namely such that He can interfere in the processes of nature with miracles,
revelations, prophecies etc. – and that is, following Einstein, in direct opposi-
tion with science, with natural laws, for which “absolutely general validity is
required”. Spinoza’s opinions about miracles were very similar, and we may
agree with both on this point, nevertheless we can doubt in Einstein’s presup-
7. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
273
position that every idea of a “personal God” implies His intervening into the
presumably fixed “order of nature”. For example, one of the most famous
philosophical theists, Leibniz, does not think of God in this way; and neither
Newton’s pantocrator performs miracles, He just “guarantees” the proper
functioning of the “world mechanism”. Even Spinoza, in spite of his negative
attitude to miracles in tractatus theologico-politicus, does not explicitly
negate the biblical “personal God”; his main point is that the Bible has to
be understood as symbolic, “moral” discourse, not as a scientific treatise.
Although Einstein agrees with such a moderate attitude towards the Holy
Script, yet he goes on in his critique of a “personal God”, and in the above
mentioned conference delivers a rather unrealistic proposal for “teachers of
religion”:
“In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the
doctrine of a personal God, that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in the past placed
such vast power in the hands of priests. In their labors they will have to avail themselves of
those forces which are capable of cultivating the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in humanity
itself.”20
Einstein, with his unexpected address to “teachers of religion” that they have
to give up “the doctrine of a personal God”, provoked many Jewish and Chris-
tian clerics, as well as other too pious people of America, and raised some
quite intolerant and anti-Semitic feelings. However, there were also some
very interesting philosophical and/or theological reactions, among them the
most known and important is the critique of the famous Protestant theologian,
Paul Tillich, himself exiled in 1933 from Germany by the Hitler regime as
the first non-Jewish professor, because of his close affiliation with the Social-
Democratic party and his opposition to Nazism. Two great men, Einstein and
Tillich, have known each other from their Berlin days in the early twenties,
and they both felt not only respect to each other, but also had much in com-
mon, especially their quest for Einheitlichkeit, Unity or Sythesis of all know-
ledge. However, after Einstein’s “provocation”, Tillich in his commentary Sci-
ence and theology: a discussion with Einstein (1941) wrote sharply that “no
criticism of this distorted idea of God can be sharp enough”, but on the other
hand he also tried to be sympathetic, offering “a solution in which [Einstein’s
argument] is accepted and overcome at the same time”.21 This alleged solu-
tion was based on Tillich’s symbolic reading of the Holy Script – Einstein had
presumably not taken into account that the term “personal God” was a symbol
for expressing “the experience of the numinous” (in the sense of Rudolf Otto),
so that “the predicate ‘personal’ can be said to the Divine only symbolically
or by analogy, or if affirmed and negated at the same time”.22 Tillich believes
and argues that “the symbol of the personal God is indispensable for living
religion”.23 And Jammer further explains Tillich’s point: “One should not use
a primitive pattern of the concept of the personal God in order to challenge
16
Abraham Pais, Einstein lived Here, Oxford
University Press, Oxford 1994, p. 121.
17
A. Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 45.
18
Ibid.
19
Ibid., pp. 46–47.
20
Ibid., p. 48.
21
M. Jammer, Einstein and religion, p. 107.
22
Paul Tillich, quoted from: M. Jammer, ibid.,
p. 111.
23
Ibid., p. 112.
8. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
274
the idea itself,” since the mature idea “need not, and in fact cannot, interfere
with science and philosophy.”24 He adds that
“Tillich’s statements converge toward Einstein’s ‘cosmic religion’ as much as is possible for a
theistic theologian.”25
A similar critique was addressed to Einstein by the famous Catholic (and also
“heretical”) theologian Hans Küng:
“If Einstein speaks of cosmic reason, this must be understood as an expression of reverence be-
fore the mystery of the Absolute, as opposed to all-too-human ‘theistic’ ideas of God. […] God
is not a person as man is a person.”26
I quite agree with Küng’s remark. I am more sceptical of Tillich’s critique, but
here I cannot enter into the discussion about complicated relations between
afirmative, negative and symbolic (or mystical) theology. I would just say that
the hermeneutical as well as theological problem of symbolic reading of the
bible is far from being definitively solved; to see it we have to consider just a
simple question: are the miracles, performed by Jesus, meant (only) simboli-
cally? And His very Resurrection – is it just a symbol? Tillich would probably
answer that symbol is not less but more than empirical reality.27 However, this
attitude is hard to accept, since it implies quite a strong version of epistemo-
logical antirealism.
Anyway, Tillich’s critique of Einstein’s maybe too simple refusal of a per-
sonal God (at least at that conference) is partly justified – especially having in
mind Tillich’s later theological reflections in his main work Systematic theo-
logy (1951), where he writes that “the God who is a person is transcended by
the God who is the Person-Itself, the ground and abyss of every person …”28
– yet, on the other hand, Einstein’s critique of a personal God as a source of
“vast power in the hands of priests” is surely justified too. I could not but
agree with Einstein in his concluding sentence of his paper on Science and
religion:
“The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that
the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and
blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge. In this sense I believe that the priest
must become a teacher if he wishes to do justice to his lofty educational mission.”29
The refusal of a personal God has several important (and not all pleasant)
consequences, among them especially these two:
a) disbelief in the immortality of the individual soul;
b) senselessness of prayer as human invocation of God’s favors.
Concerning these two points, several Einstein’s sentences are often quoted,
among them the famous concluding passage of the World as I See It (1930):
“I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind
we experience in ourselves. Neither can I nor would I want to conceive of an individual that
survives his physical death; let feeble souls, from fear or absurd egoism, cherish such thoughts.
I am satisfied with the mystery of the eternity of life and with the awareness and a glimpse of
the marvelous structure of the existing world, together with the devoted striving to comprehend
a portion, be ever so tiny, of the Reason that manifests itself in nature.”30
It is interesting to note that Einstein, in context of his critique of a personal
God, says that a will of the kind we experience in ourselves is not to be expect-
ed in God – of course, here Einstein follows Spinoza again, yet we may ask:
maybe an implicit presumption is hidden here, that not every kind of will (but
9. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
275
just such as we experience) is inappropriate for God? It seems obvious that
Einstein’s critique of a personal God is directed mainly against the anthropo-
morphic conception of God’s predicates. However, in the traditional theology
and/or philosophy of religion, God’s Will and human will are considered only
as analogous, so the essential question is: how far this analogy can be ex-
tended? Jammer, for example, points out that it is not only a question of God’s
anthropomorphism, but also of His “anthropopathism”, i. e., whether God can
have at least analogous feelings (pathos) as human beings.31 And even if we
give a negative answer also to this question, still the most difficult question
remains: is God’s Mind (that mighty cosmic logos who does not “play dice”)
at least analogous to our human mind(s)? Jammer says:
“It seems legitimate to ask whether an attribution of thoughts to God does not imply the notion
of a personal God.”32
And he quotes a prophet: “My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are
your ways my ways.” (Isaiah 55:8).
The “anthropomorphic” nature of God is, from Einstein’s point of view, par
excellence present in Christianity where God is incarnated in Jesus, “Son of
Man”. Needless to say, in spite of his great respect for Christianity as the
highest form of a “moral” religion (and in spite of his never forgotten “first
paradise”, which he had found in religion as a boy), Einstein was far from
being a Christian, he was closer to unorthodox Judaism and to the old Indian
wisdom.33 Yet, it is interesting to note that Einstein himself has often used
24
M. Jammer, ibid., p. 109.
25
Ibid., p. 112.
26
Hans Küng, quoted from: M. Jammer, ibid.,
p. 113.
27
Paul Tillich, “Religious language as symbo-
lic”, in: philosophy of religion, Michael Pe-
terson et al. (eds.), Oxford University Press,
Oxford 1996.
28
P. Tillich, quoted from: G. Holton, “Einstein’s
Third Paradise”, in Internet.
29
A. Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 49.
30
Ibid., p. 11. – In this respect, Einstein’s views,
written in letters to various people, from prie-
sts to a schoolgirl, are quite explicite as well,
for example (here quoted from Internet):
● “I cannot conceive of a personal God who
would directly influence the actions of in-
dividuals, or would directly sit in judgment
on creatures of his own creation. … Mora-
lity is of the highest importance – but for
us, not for God.” (1927)
● “Since our inner experiences consist of re-
productions and combinations of sensory
impressions, the concept of a soul without
a body seems to me to be empty and devoid
of meaning.” (1921)
● “I do not believe in immortality of the indi-
vidual, and I consider ethics to be an exclu-
sively human concern with no superhuman
authority behind it.” (1953)
● “Scientific research is based on the idea
that everything that takes place is determi-
ned 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 in-
fluenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addre-
ssed to a supernatural being.” (1936)
31
M. Jammer, Einstein and religion, p. 141.
32
Ibid., p. 123.
33
However, Einstein saw traces of “anthropo-
morphism”, although on the highest level of
knowledge, also in the Eastern wisdom. This
is evident from his meeting and discussion
with Rabindranath Tagore: while Tagore be-
lieved that “the truth of the Universe is human
truth”, Einstein protests that “this is the pure-
ly human conception of the universe” (see: A.
Pais, Einstein lived Here, p. 102–103). but
the main question remains: can our concep-
tion of the universe be other than essentially
human?
10. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
276
anthropomorphic predicates when speaking about his cosmic God. beside
addressing Him, quite traditionally, in the masculine gender, saying that “He
does not play dice” (not She or It), or speaking of “the old one” (der Alte),
Einstein also maintains, for example, that God is “subtle”, but not “malicious”
(raffiniert ist der Herr Gott, aber boshaft ist Er nicht). From the theologi-
cal and/or philosophical point of view, these linguistic details are maybe not
very important, but it is surely important to distinguish between God as a
person and an anthropomorphic God, since it is not necessary that every pos-
sible (conceivable?) God’s person is “anthropomorphic” in Einstein’s sense.
This distinction is introduced also in a recent article of Alen H. batten under
the title “Subtle are Einstein’s Thoughts”, published in the renowned journal
physics World (September, 2005). Batten writes:
“But why did Einstein not believe in a personal God? To answer that question, we have to un-
derstand what he meant by the term. I would define a personal God as a God with whom human
beings can have a relationship, analogous to those they have with one another. Although this
idea might seem to indicate that God has a human form, I think it is perfectly possible to believe
in a personal God who is not anthropomorphic. I suspect – but cannot clearly demonstrate – that
Einstein sometimes confused the two ideas.”34
Of course, the trouble is, as usually, in details – namely, what is here meant by
“a human form”: just visual, organic form, or also forma mentis? Anyway, I
agree with Batten that the distinction between “personal” and “anthropomor-
phic” has to be considered when we speak about Einstein’s God. but next to
this distinction I would add the third term: “God as Person” (this term could
be meant also in Tillich’s sense as “God who is Person-Itself”). And if we
introduce this second distinction, the difference between personal God and
God-as-person, the following question is raised: is God-as-Person indeed in-
compatible with Einstein’s “cosmic religion”? Why a “pantheistic” cosmic
God would not be Person-Itself, why He (or She or It) would not have His (or
Her or Its) Will, after all? Not a will akin to ours, not analogous to our human
will, but God’s Will. Let us remind that also Christian lord’s prayer says:
“Let Thine will happen” – not mine, but Thine! And in this sense, pantheism
and theism may finally converge. I wonder how would Einstein comment this
idea. I have the impression, together with Alan H. Batten, that Einstein’s prin-
cipal in actually the only relevant target in his critique of a “personal God”
was his refusal to accept a “limited God”, a god too much akin to ourselves.
However, the concept of a limited “anthropomorphic” god is not implied by
the concept of a personal God, and not at all by the concept of a God-as-Per-
son. The latter is not inconsistent with Einstein’s God, who is “subtle”, but
“not malicious”, and who presumably does not “play dice”.
Ad II. What has Einstein really meant with determinism? Why has he insisted
that Herr Gott würfelt nicht? Does determinism in Einstein’s sense necessar-
illy imply the negation of the freedom of the human will?
On the level of “practical reason”, namely in ethics and social life, Einstein,
as most other determinists, implicitly presupposed some “compatibilism”
between deterministic laws of nature and human free will, since it is indis-
pensable for ethical responsibility of our decisions and deeds. On the other
hand, Einstein several times explicitly rejected the philosophical concept of
freedom of the human will, for example in his contribution for Festschrift für
professor A. Stodola (1929):
“Honestly I cannot understand what people mean when they talk about the freedom of the hu-
man will. I have a feeling, for instance, that I will something or other; but what relation this has
11. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
277
with freedom I cannot understand at all. I feel that I will to light my pipe and I do it; but how can
I connect this up with the idea of freedom? What is behind the act of willing to light the pipe?
Another act of willing? Schopenhauer once said: ‘Der Mensch kann was er will; er kann aber
nicht wollen was er will’ (‘man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills’.)”35
Einstein is even more explicit in his already quoted, famous speech the World
As I See It (1930):
“I do not at all believe in human freedom in the philosophical sense. Everybody acts not only
under external compulsion but also in accordance with inner necessity. Schopenhauer’s saying,
‘A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants,’ has been a very real inspiration to
me since my youth; it has been a continual consolation in the face of life’s hardships, my own
and others’, and an unfailing well-spring of tolerance. This realization mercifully mitigates the
easily paralyzing sense of responsibility and prevents us from taking ourselves and other people
all too seriously; it is conducive to a view of life which, in particular, gives humor its due.”36
From the point of the so-called “common sense”, which considers the nega-
tion of human freedom as something undesirable and troublesome, it is rather
strange that Einstein finds “consolation” in the “inner necessity”, and even
derives the source of tolerance out of it. Somebody might also remark that
Einstein’s “humor” in taking people not “too seriously” is close to cynism.
However, it is far from that. Einstein follows Spinoza again in this mild and
gentle sage’s attitude towards human affairs and life in general. max Jammer
truly says that Einstein’s “theorethical endorsement of determinism in no way
affects the demands of practical ethics”.37 Nevertheless, for rationally based
compatibilism of necessity and human freedom some troubles and worries re-
main, since the question of compatibility in the proposed solution, following
Schopenhauer, is just transferred to the “metalevel”; yet, if we cannot want
what we want, isn’t it actually the same as not doing what we want?
However, it seems that Einstein was more as in freedom of the human will
interested in the freedom of God’s will, and within this context he usually
placed the question whether determinism obtains or not. In a letter to one of
his assistants in Princeton, Ernst Straus, he wrote:
“What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world.”38
In the history of philosophy there were different answers to this for our human
brain indeed difficult question – for example, Spinoza’s answer was negative,
while Leibniz’s positive. In order to better understand Einstein’s troubles con-
cerning God’s choice (i. e., His freedom of Will) in creation of the world, we
have to specify the context a little more.
Einstein did not ask himself as Leibniz, if the Creator had the free choice to
select in his Mind the world which He was going to create (and, as stands
in theodicy, God allegedly selected the best possible world), but he asked
himself if Herr Gott had the choice to select an imperfect world: im-per-
fect as un-finished, namely from the physical point of view, world in whose
very depth, in its deepest foundations, is hidden (and presumably revealed by
34
Alen H. Batten, “Subtle are Einstein’s
thoughts”, physics World, Forum, Sept. 2005,
quoted from Internet.
35
A. Pais, Einstein lived Here, p. 132.
36
A. Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 8–9.
37
M. Jammer, ibid., p. 86.
38
A. Einstein, quoted from: G. Holton, “Ein-
stein’s Third Paradise”, in Internet.
12. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
278
quantum mechanics) an irreducible contingency, “just chance”, which was in
Einstein’s eyes a terrific gap in God’s creation, an inadmissible absence of the
“objective reality”. This gap can be, in the best but still bad case, ful-filled
only post festum, namely with human (or “observer’s”) intervention, when
that formidably unreal quantum “superposition” finally “collapses” into some
definite, “objective” state. In this sense, also in this sense, we can understand
Einstein’s most famous dictum that God does not – and should not – “play
dice”. As the legend says, Einstein’s main opponent Niels Bohr, the propo-
nent of the “Copenhagen interpretation” of quantum phenomena, which has
become standard, advised Einstein not to tell God what He should do. How-
ever, the great problem of the “objective reality” has never been adequately
solved in (QM), and also some of the main quantum physicists, especially
Schrödinger who discovered the wave-function equation, were not satisfied
with Bohr’s “phenomenological” interpretation.
Einstein’s worries about indeterminism of (Qm) can be formulated in several
ways which are basically equivalent. The classical formulation can be found
also in Abraham Pais’ second monograph. Pais puts the question:
“What did Einstein mean by God not playing dice?”39
And he explains that in the classical mechanics, given the initial positions
and velocities of the particles, it is possible to predict their positions and ve-
locities at any later time for any individual collision – but not so in (QM), as
Einstein’s close friend, quantum physicist Max Born has written:
“One obtains the answer to the question not ‘what is the state after the collision’but ‘how proba-
ble is a given effect of the collision’… Here the whole problem of determinism arises. From the
point of view of quantum mechanics there exists no quantity which in an individual case cau-
sally determines the effect of a collision… The motions of particles follow probability laws.”40
Probability laws themselves are of course necessary as well as all other scien-
tific laws (for example, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle or Schrödinger’s
wave-function equation as such are perfectly necessary, not in the least prob-
able), however, necessity of quantum laws on their “metalevel” does not solve
Einstein’s concern about the absence of “objective reality” and causation in
quantum phenomena, where, as everywhere in nature, God should not “play
dice”. Probability laws express contingency of the physical world, which is,
following the Copenhagen interpretation, only phenomenologically “real”,
without some deeper ontological foundation. This irreducible contingency of
quantum phenomena threatens to undermine that magnificent necessity of the
“pillars of creation” whose outlines have begun to be discovered by Einstein’s
“field equations” of (GTR).
Confronted with quantum mechanics, Einstein reacted in a very rational way, in
His way. Pais quotes one of Einstein’s earliest expressions of dissent with the
new (QM), dating from 1926, contained in his reply to one of Born’s letters:
“Quantum mechanics is certainly imposing. But an inner voice tells me that it is not yet the real
thing. The theory says a lot, but does not really bring us any closer to the secret of the ‘old one’.
I, at any rate, am convinced that He is not playing at dice.”41
Einstein refers to his “inner voice”, to his deep intuition which enabled him
to formulate his great theory (GTR). And, we may ask: who can state with
certainty that he was not right in an essential sense, after all? Namely, even
if strict determinism does not obtain, was Einstein’s insisting on necessity
of causation and objective reality indeed a mistake? Let us remind here of
13. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
279
some other Einstein’s “mistake” which he himself considered as the greatest
– the cosmological constant λ. Cosmological investigations in the last decade
suggest that maybe it was not a mistake at all, but a precious idea, born from
Einstein’s brilliant intuition.42
but let us return to God who does not play dice. What is actually the main
Einstein’s concern here? Determinism or validity of the universal “Law of
Causation”? Some people think that these two terms are equivalent, and Ein-
stein himself does not distinguish them explicitly, however, from the philo-
sophical point of view, they have to be clearly distinguished. Consequently, I
think that the principal, albeit somehow overlooked or rather misinterpreted
philosophical problem here is the universal validity of causation, not just de-
terminism in the strict (Spinozistic) sense. We may see Einstein’s concern for
causality also from his already considered opposition to a personal God in his
first essay on religion and Science (1930):
“The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot
for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events – provided, of
course, that he takes the hypothesis of causality really seriously.”43
And also in his later years, Einstein never ceased to stress the importance of
causal explanations, as we can see, for example, in his letter to a close friend
Michele Besso (1948):
“But for me, the cogitative basis is the trust in an unrestricted causality.”44
It means: seriously has to be taken the universal causal determination of
events, but it does not mean that eo ipso all events are determined in advance
as far as we go to the future.45 Determinism and the universal “Law of Cau-
39
A. Pais, Einstein lived Here, p. 129.
40
Max Born, in Zeitschr. für phys. 37 (1926),
here quoted from A. Pais, Einstein lived
Here.
41
A. Einstein, in the letter to Born, dated De-
cember 4th, 1926 (quoted from: Marx Born,
The Born–Einstein Letters 1916–1955, Mac-
millan Press, New York 2005, p. 88).
42
In a letter to John Moffat, on May 25, 1953,
Einstein wrote: “Every individual […] has
to retain his way of thinking if he does not
want to get lost in the maze of possibilities.
However, nobody is sure of having taken the
right road, me the least. ” (Discover – Special
Einstein Issue, September 2004, p. 68.)
43
A. Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 39 (italics
by the author).
44
Quoted from: M. Jammer, Einstein and reli-
gion, p. 87.
45
Einstein, of course, knows well that many
processes in nature, especially those which
involve thermodynamics, are too complex to
be predicted by any available physical the-
ory, however, this complexity does not mean
that causality does not work. In his already
quoted paper Science and religion (1941),
he wrote: “To be sure, when the number of
factors coming into play in a phenomenolo-
gical complex is too large, scientific method
in most cases fails us. One need only think of
the weather, in which case prediction even for
a few days ahead is impossible. Nevertheless
no one doubts that we are confronted with a
causal connection whose causal components
are in the main known to us. Occurrences in
this domain are beyond the reach of exact
prediction because of the variety of factors in
operation, not because of any lack of order in
nature.” (Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 47)
– So we have to distinguish two different me-
anings of uncertainty: on the one hand uncer-
tainty of predictions in thermodynamics whi-
ch is just “factual”, deriving from hypercom-
plexity of processes, and on the other hand
principal uncertainty in quantum mechanics
(Heisenberg). Nevertheless, can we guess
that behind Einstein’s critique of (QM) there
is some implicit belief that these two kinds
of uncertainty have, from the epistemological
point of view, yet something in common?
14. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
280
sation” would be equivalent under (at least) two conditions: 1) if we had some
well-formed “Final Theory”, some scientific “Theory of Everything” (TOE) or
simply the theory (T) in Einstein’s ideal sense, and 2) if the causal relation in
(T) were well-defined (for example, defined as being transitive, asymmetric etc.)
– but actually we do not have any well-formed (T), neither we have an exact and
comprehensive scientific concept of causality … so, we have to ask: what do we
actually mean when we talk of strict determinism in scientific contexts?
I think that the term ‘determinism’ can have an exact scientific sense only
within some well-formed theory. Several definitions of determinism which
occur in philosophical literature, especially in analytic philosophy, have to be
read only as schemes of definitions, for example:
“Determinism. The world is governed by determinism, if and only if, given a specified way
things are at a time t, the way things go thereafter is fixed as a matter of natural law.”46
This is a nice definition-scheme, but not a proper definition of determinism
itself. In order to obtain it, we have to precise what actually is the “natural
law” in the definiens, otherwise said, we have to presuppose a well-formed
theory which expresses this law, actually a set or a system of laws – for exam-
ple Newton’s classical mechanics or Einstein’s (GTR) etc. Only within some
well-formed theory the question of determinism can have a proper scientific
sense. But we do not have any well-formed “theory of everything” (T), so the
traditional philosophical concept of “universal determinism” (“everything is
determined”, namely in advance, as far as we go) cannot be well-defined as
a scientific concept.
It is interesting to note that in some Einstein’s late statements “his insistence
on the primacy of an unrestricted determinism somewhat abated”.47 Jam-
mer refers to a passage from Wolfgang’s Pauli’s letter to Max Born, dated 31
March, 1954:
“In particular, Einstein does not consider the concept of ‘determinism’ to be as fundamental as
it is frequently held to be (as he told me emphatically many times), and he denied energetically
that he had ever put up a postulate such as (your letter, para. 3): ‘the sequence of such conditions
must also be objective and real, that is, automatic, machine-like, deterministic’. In the same way,
he disputes that he uses as criterion for the admissibility of a theory the question ‘Is it rigorously
deterministic?’ – Einstein’s point of departure is ‘realistic’ rather than ‘deterministic’, which
means that his philosophical prejudice is a different one.”48
Jammer comments this interesting passage that
“… this shift in Einstein’s position was, partially at least, the result of his failure to disprove
the Heisenberg indeterminancy relation, which form an integral part of the standard version of
quantum mechanics”.49
We may agree with this statement, however, it has to be added that Einstein’s
polemic with proponents of (QM), especially with Niels Bohr (in Solvay
Conferences) and Max Born (in letters) has been from its beginnings in twen-
ties more orientated against the “standard” (“Copenhagen”) interpretation of
indeterminancy laws than against these laws themselves.
As it has been already said, we have to distinguish between determinism in
the strict philosophical sense and the universal validity of the “Law of Causa-
tion”, especially from the point of the epistemology of science. Namely, in
spite of the fact that we do not have any exact and comprehensive scientific
concept of causality (so as we do not have any exact scientific concept of
determinism), the “Law of Causation” – with contrast to the “hypothesis of
determinism” – has a status of a principle in every scientific investigation. It
is supposed to be valid universally, even if we do not know or cannot prove
15. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
281
it in some occasions, especially in (QM); namely, we cannot disprove it nei-
ther. The universal validity of causation, understood as the general principle
that every event should have its cause (even if we do not know and cannot
explain the nature of some presumably causal relations), has not been strictly
disproved in (QM), neither strictly demonstrated as incompatible with the
indeterminancy laws, which, as we know, have very convincing empirical
support. The rational thought presupposes causality “in principle”, regard-
less of the specific concept of causality which may differ in various theories
or historical epochs (for example, in Aristotelian epistéme, the “final cause”,
causa finalis, was included among the “natural” causes, what is after Galileo
and Newton, up to Einstein, of course not the case).
The principle of universal causality is by its epistemological status simi-
lar to Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason. both principles have to be a
priori valid in order to develop science as rational discourse. miracles are
excluded from science, also from (QM). Speaking about Einstein’s rejection
of miracles, namely from the scientific point of view, Max Jammer says that
Einstein’s belief in an unrestricted “determinism” (i. e. causality) in science
can be understood as his belief that “an unalternable antecedent–consequent
relation is a necessary condition for the comprehensibility of experience ([that
is] essentially a Kantian idea).”50 From this point of view, which is close to
mine, causality has the epistemological status of a category of reason. Here I
cannot go further into discussion if causality is a transcendental category in
Kantian sense, if it is known a priori etc. my intention here is just to point out
that Einstein’s “intuition” that (QM) is not a complete theory, that it is some-
how provisional, “not yet the real thing”, since (QM) does not yield causal
explanations – has a strong philosophical support, and that it is “in principle”
maybe right, in spite of the well-verified quantum indeterminancy. Otherwise
said, that (GTR) is maybe compatible with the (Qm) on some level which has
not been discovered yet.
Let us resume: Einstein’s principal objection against (QM) is sometimes
understood mainly as his insisting on the strict determinism in science. but
things are more complicated, since the question of “objective reality” is deep-
er than the question whether determinism obtains or not. We have pointed
out that Einstein did not want to sacrifice causality, not just determinism as
we usually understand it. Namely, if we give up the “Law of Causation” as
a general principle of science, we come too close to some deficient “agnos-
tic” attitude which only “saves the phenomena” with successful mathemati-
cal models, without really understanding them. (“Saving phenomena …” – it
sounds familiar, like some déjà vu.) That’s why it is important to take into
account the epistemological distinctions between some basic concepts which
we are inclined to confuse.
Of course, I do not think that Einstein’s old “Universal Field Theory” (UFT)
is going to prevail over contemporary (Qm). It is more probable that the rela-
46
Carl Hoefer, “Causal Determinism”, in: Stan-
ford Encyclopedia of philosophy, available in
Internet.
47
M. Jammer, Einstein and religion, p. 53.
48
Wolfgang Pauli, in: the Born–Einstein
letters, p. 216.
49
M. Jammer, Einstein and religion, p. 53–54.
50
M. Jammer, ibid., p. 88 (italics added by the
author).
16. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
282
tivistic “locality” has to be sacrificed for some new type of “holism” in phy-
sics, and maybe also anisotropy of time has to be reconsidered. For the mo-
ment, these are just “queries”, if we use Newton’s term. Anyway, it is difficult
to imagine that the principle of causation itself would be given up in science,
since human reason cannot be satisfied with “phenomenological” descriptions
only, nevertheless how sophisticated and mathematically elegant they might
be. Let us remind of another Einstein’s well-known remark that “the most
incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible”.
In the end, I will quote Einstein’s famous passage concerning his “experience
of mystery”. But before quoting this passage, let me hint the following specu-
lation: in case, if Einstein indeed found his great final Theory (T) – otherwise
said, in case if absolutely no “hidden variables” remained in explaining our
world – would then still be possible our “experience of mystery”? Could we
still admire with “wonder and awe” the magnificent God’s “Design” of the
Cosmos? Or, is it maybe opposite the case: that just then our admiration of
His Subtlety, Beauty and Truth would be perfect? Of course I have to leave
this dilemma open.
And here is the famous passage from the World As I See It (1930):
“The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion
that stands at the cradle of true art and true science. Whoever does not know it and can no longer
wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed. It was the experience of
mystery – even if mixed with fear – that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of
something we cannot penetrate, our perceptions of the profoundest reason and the most radiant
beauty, which only in their most primitive forms are accessible to our minds: it is this knowledge
and this emotion that constitute true religiosity. In this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply
religious man.”51
References:
1. Einstein, Albert (1954, sd. ed. 1982): Ideas and Opinions, Three Rivers Press, New
York. (This edition includes most articles from two original collections: the World
As I See It and Out of My later Years, Philosophical Library, New York, 1949 and
1950).
2. Albert Einstein: the Human Side (1979): ed. Helen Ducas and Banesh Hoffman, Prin-
ceton University Press.
3. Born, Max (2005): The Born–Einstein Letters 1916–1955, Macmillan Press, New York.
4. Pais, Abraham (1982): Subtle is the lord, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
5. Pais, Abraham (1994): Einstein lived Here, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
6. Jammer, Max (1999): Einstein and religion, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
7. Holton, Gerald: “Einstein’s Third Paradise”, Daedalus, Fall 2003.
8. Holton, Gerald (2004): “Paul Tillich, Albert Einstein, and the Quest for the Ultimate”
(from Internet).
9. Tillich, Paul (1996): “Religious Language as Symbolic”, in: philosophy of religion,
michael Peterson et al. (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford.
10. Batten, Alan H.: “Subtle are Einstein’s Thoughts”, physics World, Forum, Sept. 2005.
11. Hoefer, Carl: “Causal Determinism”, in Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy, in In-
ternet.
12. Petković, Tomislav (2005): “Albert Einstein – čovjek i djelo”, in: Eksperimentalna
fizika i spoznajna teorija, Školska knjiga, Zagreb.
13. Discover – Special Einstein Issue, September 2004.
17. SYNTHESIS PHILOSOPHICA
42 (2/2006) pp. (267–283)
M. Uršič, Einstein on Religion and Science
283
Marko Uršić
Albert Einstein – Wissenschaft und Religion
Zusamenfassung
Der Artikel setzt sich vornehmlich mit der Frage auseinander, was es mit Einsteins berühm-
tem Dictum Gott würfelt nicht im philosophischen und/oder theologischen Sinne auf sich hat.
Welches ist das grundlegende Konzept der Notwendigkeit, auf der dieser Satz beruht, und vor
allem: Welcher Gott, der nicht spielt, ist hier gemeint – der theistische, der deistische oder
der pantheistische? Einige Abschnitte aus Einsteins Schriften und öffentlichen reden legen die
Vermutung nahe, dass er dem pantheismus zugeneigt war, in Anlehnung an Spinoza, den er stets
bewunderte und von allen philosophen am meisten schätzte. Allerdings setzt Spinozas panthei-
smus Determinismus voraus, was vermutlich nicht der Hauptgrund für Einsteins protest gegen
einen „würfelnden Gott” in der Quantenphysik gewesen sein mag… Sollte demnach Einste-
ins Gott dem Newton’schen Pantokrator oder Spinozas Deus sive natura näher stehen? Das ist
möglich, aber nur wenn der Universalherrscher seine Kreaturen, uns winzige Geschöpfe, in
einem immensen und vor allem „wohltemperierten” Universum weder bestraft noch belohnt.
Das Änigma des berühmten Satzes bleibt ungelöst.
Schlüsselwörter
Gott, Würfeln, Pantheismus, Determinismus, Religion, Wissenschaft, Albert Einstein
Marko Uršič
Albert Einstein – Science et Religion
Sommaire
le problème principal présenté dans cet article est le point de vue philosophique ou théolo-
gique d’Einstein dans sa phrase célèbre: Dieu ne joue pas aux dés. Quel en était le concept
« fondamental » de nécessité? Et avant tout: quel est ce Dieu qui ne joue pas aux dés? Est-ce
un Dieu théiste, déiste ou panthéiste? Certains autres passages des écrits informels d’Einstein
et de ses discours montrent qu’il était très proche du panthéisme, admirateur de Spinoza qu’il
considérait comme le plus grand des philosophes. pourtant le panthéisme de Spinoza implique
le déterminisme qui, probablement, n’a pas été la raison principale de son désaccord avec Dieu
qui joue aux dés dans la physique quantique.
Donc il est sans importance que le Dieu d’Einstein soit plus proche du Pantocrator de Newton,
ou plutôt de Deus sive natura de Spinoza. peut-être que oui, mais seulement si le Souverain
universel ne punit ni ne récompense ses créatures, donc nous-mêmes, ces êtres minuscules dans
ce monde immense et bien harmonisé. l’énigme est toujours posée.
Mots clés
Dieu, jouer aux dés, panthéisme, déterminisme, religion, science, Albert Einstein
51
Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p. 11.