In Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion, Albert Einstein is depicted as an atheist. Dawkins pretty much has to go this route, because it would be a major embarassment for him if Einstein was a religious believer. Afer all, Dawkins seeks to show that theism is pretty much incompatible with modern science. If Einstein disagrees, then who is Dawkins to say otherwise?
Moreover, as I show in my new book What's So Great About Christianity, most of the great scientists of the past 500 years (Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Brahe, Descartes, Newton, Leibniz, Gassendi, Pascal, Mersenne, Cuvier, Harvey, Dalton, Faraday, Herschel, Joule, Lyell, Lavoisier, Priestley, Kelvin, Ohm, Ampere, Steno, Pasteur, Maxwell, Planck, Mendel, Lemaitre) were devout Christians. Gassendi, Mersenne and Lemaitre were priests.
Faced with this daunting list of believers, Dawkins is desperate to wrest Einstein for the atheist camp.
The problem for Dawkins is that Einstein repeatedly refers to God. Famously Einstein said "God is subtle but He is not malicious" and "God does not play dice" with the universe. Dawkins rewrites Einstein's remarks. "God does not play dice" becomes "Randomness does not lie at the heart of all things." Dawkins insists that his revisions are justified because "Einstein was using 'God' in a purely metaphorical, poetic sense."
Dawkins' case for Einstein's atheism is based on quotations from Max Jammer's book Einstein and Religion. At best, Dawkins writes, Einstein was a pantheist who identified God with the laws of nature themselves. But when philosopher Anthony Flew went to the original source, he discovered that Dawkins had lifted quotations favorable to his case while excluding statements that refuted it. Einstein specifically repudiated both the atheist and the pantheist label. "I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist." Dawkins forgot to include that line. While Einstein clearly stated that he did not believe in a "personal God" he also spoke of God as a "superior mind," "Illimitable spirit" and "mysterious force that moves the constellations."
Einstein spoke of the laws of nature pointing to an Infinite Mind that to him represented the true nature of God. "Every one who is seriously engaged in te pursuit of science becomes convinced that the laws of nature manifest the existence of a spirit vastly superior to that of men, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble...My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details that we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."
Isn't it interesting that these quotations appear nowhere in Dawkins' book. It seems that atheists like Dawkins have to suppress the facts in order to establish their theories. Can an atheism so selective and indeed manipulative actually claim to be sustained by evidence and reason?
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 51)
31. Thoughts to ponder. Hubble has shown that the GALAXIES are basically stacked up like DNA chains. Could it be that our ENTIRE universe is no more than a cell of God? Could we be so miniscule that there is NO WAY to understand the minute presence we have. Now science has "proven" there are more than one UNIVERSE. HUMM other cells in God? I never will completely understand human arrogance and the inablility to understand our brain is smaller than an ant's brain comparatively speaking with regard to the entire existance including multi universes. Give it up people and enjoy what you were given.
Diana Hanson at 9:10AM on Oct 9th 2007
32. Let me get this straight, Dinesh:
A bunch of scientists in the past and now believe that there is a god.
Therefore, there is a god?
What sort of tosswad crap is that?
Knight_of_BAAWA at 9:27AM on Oct 9th 2007
33. I agree with einstein about the infinite mind. That's not your 'god,' dinesh. You are stupid enough to think so, however. Many quantum physicists have become MYSTICS, not religious people. Quantum physics seems to imply the existence of a mind, not a god. Nothing like you think of god. In order to get it, you'd need to lost that faith that blinds you and open up to the possibility that you're wrong, so no danger of that ever happenning.
"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own--a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism."
- Albert Einstein
That's YOU Dinesh. The part about ridiculous egotism. :-)
Brian at 9:40AM on Oct 9th 2007
34. “I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.” (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_einstein.html).
Did Einstein believe in God? Although he called himself an Agnostic, by all accounts, he at least believed in a higher power that governed the universe, but wasn't involved in the trivial actions of man.
“My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment.” (ibid).
Unlike Mr. Dawkins and some on this board, Einstein also did not take an antagonistic approach to those that believed.
“I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.” (ibid).
If you choose not to believe, then that is your right to do so. If you feel that God and religion based on God is a superstition, then believe away. If you want me to believe it, then prove it. Provide me proof that God doe not exist. In the absence of that proof, your non-belief isn’t any more or less superstitious than mine. From my perspective, miracles still happen. Personally, I have witnessed things that only the existence and interference of God (or a higher power) can explain where the medical sciences could not.
Have bad things happened in history in the name of God? Sure. The inquisition comes to mind. But then so have bad things happened in history that didn’t have anything to do with God, or was an antithesis to anything Godly: the Jewish holocaust or Stalin’s mass executions for example. The counter argument to all the bad thing in history is that there have also been good things that have their roots in a belief if God and religion: most of our early hospitals bare the name of a Saint, and charities such as Habitat for Humanity come to mind. In an open minded and unbiased discussion of religion, you can not bring attention to the bad and ignore out the good.
Did Einstein believe in God. Frankly, I don’t care if he did or not. I think he believed in Freedom. In a democratic society such as the one we live in, all I care about is that I have the freedom to believe what I want to believe, and you can choose to believe or not to believe.
Ed at 9:45AM on Oct 9th 2007
35. Wow - it's amazing how insane atheists get when you mention the word God - so insane, they completely miss the entire point of the blog.
Look at what Dinesh is actually saying. Nowhere in the article does he suggest that Einstein was a CHRISTIAN. Ken (post #19) - you quote Einstein as writing: "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.”
You know who else posted something similar? DINESH: "While Einstein clearly stated that he did not believe in a "personal God" he also spoke of God as a "superior mind," "Illimitable spirit" and "mysterious force that moves the constellations."
It's amazing what happens when you take the time to read. You're trying to prove a point that DINESH already did.
So, what's the point of the article?
Einstein was NOT an Atheist. Dawkins wrongly claims he was. Dinesh was not arguing that Einstein almost went to seminary or was at church every Sunday morning and evening and read the Bible cover-to-cover each week...Dinesh is merely pointing out that Dawkins is a liar when he says Einstein was an Atheist.
How did you all miss that? Take a deep breath and use the brain God gave you to take the time to contribute something useful to the discussion.
Jeff at 1:37PM on Oct 9th 2007
36. Well, I'm not an atheist either... Am I your idea of a Christian?
I believe as Einstein did... And Heisenberg and Bohr, for that matter...
It's so far beyond your understanding that you all look silly trying to talk about it. Goo-goo, ga-ga... That's how you all sound.
Brian at 10:07AM on Oct 9th 2007
37. If religion and prayers solved mankind's problems then we would NEVER need science now would we? As for Einstein, well, would anyone care for him if he had spent majority of this time at the wailing wall? No! Hell no! The guy did not care about religion! End of story!
Robb at 10:21AM on Oct 9th 2007
38. Since you christians don't believe in science, I have a suggestion. Please stop using it.
You keep on speaking out against science, but then you use science in your lives constantly, and that's just hypocritical. You insist on using modern medicine when your faith in God should suffice for any cure. You insist on using modern automobiles when a horse would do. You even have microwave ovens and electric lights!!! When are you going to put your money where your big mouths are and STOP using the science that you have spurned? Please stop using medicine and eating frozen foods and watching television and using all the other things that science has given us. You've abdicated your right to use science, since you've set yourself up against it. So, just STOP IT! Stop the hypocrisy! Surely your FAITH is sufficient to the task, no?
Brian at 11:05AM on Oct 9th 2007
39. Responding to Tom,
Your posts do not refute DD's position, they SUPPORT DD's position. DD nevers claims that Einstein believed in the Judeao-Christian God of Abraham, Isaac, & Jacob.
If Einstein is a Buddhist, then he is a theist, which is what DD is claiming. Not an atheist as Dawkins so desparately wants Einstein to be.
Please pay attention to the words. They do matter!
ray at 11:06AM on Oct 9th 2007
40. If Einstein is a Buddhist, then he is a theist,
----------------------------------------------
NO!!! Buddhists don't believe in a "theos" or god, they believe in Maya and unattachment to reality...
You people are truly pathetic.
Brian at 11:08AM on Oct 9th 2007
41. I believe that it is rather pointless to guess the religiosity of anyone whom you can not directly ask. Many of the people mentioned as religious in the atricle could have been so for either convenience sake (they may have been ignored if they denounced religion or worse tortured). Most of the scientific minds mentioned really had not much to say one way or the other, we could probably guess that many of them could have changed their minds had they known things that we have since learned. We need to dwell in the present not the past. To assume that religion and God are true based on information that was incomplete at the time does nothing to prove anything.
Scott at 11:13AM on Oct 9th 2007
42. "The fool has said in his heart 'there is no God'" (Psalm 14:1)
sj at 11:13AM on Oct 9th 2007
43. Responding to Tom (#10), who wrote: "is fear of punishment in the afterlife a good basis for a religious life?"
Excellent question! And the answer is a very sad commentary on human beings. But has no logic bearing on the question of the existence of God.
Ask that same question of yourself?
If there was no fear of speeding tickets, would you always obey the speed limits?
If there was no fear of arrest, yould YOU obey all of the laws of your community?
If you knew that the IRS would not prosecute you for paying only 80% of your tax bill, would YOU pay the last 20%?
Please identify an existing society that does not have laws and PUNITIVE measures to compel compliance with those laws. Regarding the "carrot vs stick" approach to influencing people's behavior, what society does not use the "stick"?
Again, your question is excellent, but only speaks poorly on ALL mankind.
ray at 11:20AM on Oct 9th 2007
44. You folks who maintain your atheism after reading this article, let me ask you a series of questions.
1. Assuming we evolved from another primate, why are there no longer intermediary species in existence? Why haven't we continued to evolve into a different type of primate since the dawn of humanity?
2. Although science has been able to break down organic matter and view the "building blocks" of life, they are still unable to create life "from scratch." Theories swirl as to how life came from non-living matter, but there is no definite explaination, and there has been no re-creation of this event. Science is based on hypothesis and proving hypothesis. This theory is still unscientific. How do you think life got here?
3. Assuming the big-bang did occur and somehow we earthlings are benifitting from dumb luck (ie earth's rate of rotation, tilt, distance from sun, life sustaining atmoshphere, hydrogen, etc.), where did all of the matter in the universe that comprised the big bang come from?
Mark at 11:42AM on Oct 9th 2007
45. Jeff,
Dinesh is actually picking on an insignificant point. THAT is the real point! Who cares if Einstein believed in a god or not? What does it matter?
Knight_of_BAAWA at 11:28AM on Oct 9th 2007