Atheists seem very eager to claim Einstein for one of their own. Richard Dawkins devotes a whole section to Einstein in The God Delusion and Christopher Hitchens' Portable Atheist is peppered with Einstein quotations seemingly rejecting all belief in God. Recently an Einstein letter surfaced which showed the great scientist scorning the idea that the Jews were in any sense God's chosen people.
But all that these quotations prove is that Einstein was not an orthodox believer. He rejected the idea of a personal God "who would directly influence the actions of individuals or would sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation." Einstein also rejeted the immortality of the soul, noting that "one life is enough for me."
At the same time, Walter Isaacson in his celebrated new biography Einstein provides ample evidence that Einstein not only believed in a higher or transcendent power, but also that Einstein despised atheists. Here are some quotations, drawn from Isaacson's book with full documentation, that I offer as a needed counterbalance to the one-sided list provided by Dawkins, Hitchens and the others.
On whether he considered himself religious: "Yes, you could call it that. Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible laws and connections, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this foce beyond anything we can comprehend is my religion."
On whether he accepted the historical existence of Christ: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."
On whether he considered himself an atheist: "I'm not an atheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what that is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the most intelligent human toward God."
On the nature of God: "That deeply emotional conviction of a presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."
On whether science leads to religion: "Every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of nature--a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort."
On how religion motivates scientific inquiry: "The cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific research."
On whether science and religion are at odds: "The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
On how he feels about atheist efforts to claim him as an ally: "There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."
On how he regards atheists: "The fanatical atheists...are creatures who cannot her the music of the spheres. I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist. What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos."
Reader Comments ( Page 6 of 24)
76. I think there's one question everyone should be asking: Who cares?
Atheist and thesists aren't playing a game of 'who's got the best people on their team.' Do I care if Enstein was a man of faith or of science or a blend of both? Not really. There's infinitely more to admire about the man without having to snip and snipe over the specifics of what be believed.
It's like Hitler. Was he a christian or was he a non-theist? Either side would scream and shout about how he's not on their side so he must be on the other. It doesn't matter. Hitler's stance of religion won't do anything to change the atrocities that he and his followers perpetrated.
Turning religion and science into a game of "best members on our side, worst on theirs" undermines the specific uniqueness that makes human beings great. Mother Theresa devoted her live to the humanist causes of christianity. She also had grave doubts about the nature and benevolence of God. Either side of the debate can take those two aspects to distort and attack the other side... and the only one that loses is the memory and respect for Mother Theresa.
This is just another waste of time over a pointless conflict manufactured by Dinesh.
Somber at 6:15PM on May 21st 2008
77. (This is the part where tay would call me HOT. It's a shame we had to ostracize her...)
Mokele Mbembe at 4:47PM
Don't you mean - them...
TJ at 6:16PM on May 21st 2008
78. You went to Stanford? HAHAHAHAHAHA! You think your being cute when your really a clown. Einstein was basiclly a DEIST in his religious leanings. You put that question about your dead cult hero Jesus in there to make it seem like Albert E. was equating Jesus with God. Einstein believed in a universal God not your dead Middle East cult hero who is still dead.
Larry at 6:28PM on May 21st 2008
79. And Somber is right,
who cares?
I don't care about DD's blog or what Einstein thought.
Goodnight all.
TJ at 6:29PM on May 21st 2008
80. Why? A third possibility is the earth and everything in it evolved through natural selection of species with the best adaptations/mutations for survival, making the earth APPEAR designed. The earth is just a place with the potential to host life, and life occured.>>
I have no problem with Darwin ... as far as it goes. I'm talking about the laws of the universe. The elegant laws of phyiscs, or everything in the universe that came before life, that made life possible.
If I need a lable, I guess you would have called me a bible thumper. That is, before I had an interest in unified theory. The theory of everything. I don't beleive anyone can take a serious look at this very weird universe and not believe in design or opt for infinite universes. Either this universe was designed or there are infinite universes and this weird one just happens to allow life to exist.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You have defined 'universe' as 'not infinite' and defined 'God' as 'infinite'.
Word game. >>
I was talking about infinite universeS as in number of. Either there is a God creator that specifically made this universe so that life could exist or this is simply one in an infinite number of universes that just happens (due to the laws of averages) allow life to exist.
It's not a word game, but thanks for playing.
Thomas J Gassett at 7:03PM on May 21st 2008
81. For once I have to defend Dinesh to a degree. I don't see how he was trying to convince you anti-theists about Einstein supporting the Judeo-Christian God. What he did was offer more evidence that the physical enigmas and the spiritual ones were one and the same for Einstein.
Having read a lot of quotes on spirituality from him, he strikes me as having been centered around agnosticism with various occasions in the spiritual arena and empirical arena. But neither of those were really conducive to how he felt as a whole.
The lovely thing about theist and anti-theist rhetoric is that their debates and scathing critiques of each other are really quite narrow in scope.
Perhaps Einstein didn't agree with any of you? Somebody who doesn't seem to have been solely spiritual, atheistic or agnostic.
Maybe he was inconsistent, or maybe he saw something that none of you have, and defies your petty arenas.
oneblood at 7:13PM on May 21st 2008
82. I guess my response to this earth shattering revelation is 'so what'. Newton believed in alchemy, Hippocrates believed in the greek gods and so on. None of that affects the contributions they made elsewhere. Expertise in one area is no guarantee of competence or enlightenment in another.
Steve at 7:17PM on May 21st 2008
83. "thanks for playing.
Thomas J Gassett at 7:03PM on May 21st 2008"
Gassett, huge props for not sticking to the "blunt force attack drive by post" method. It's refreshing to see people having an actual discussion with you.
brandon at 7:40PM on May 21st 2008
84. I suppose this eternal argument boils down to how you perceive the universe. On both ends are the believers who will grasp any straw that can be twisted or molded to conform to their beliefs. It doesn't seem to matter to them how obtuse the reference may be or even if it is fabricated as long as it supports their existing beliefs. Such people may be theists or atheists.
Included in the middle are the skeptics. Personally I think the best description of the skeptic is the famous quote from Carl Sagan, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Skeptcs tend to look at the universe as it appears to be and often are not convinced that the evidence is sufficient to point to any creator or designer. Sagan himself demonstrated an example of this when asked by a reporter whether there was life beyond the earth. Sagan was known for his poetic thought experiments about extraterestrial life, but he answered “that he had no idea” because the evidence wasn't there to support the claim. When pressed by the shocked reporter, he said that it was 'ok to not have all the answers'. Skeptics are comfortable with uncertainty. They hope that true truth seekers will chip away at the uncertainty over time but don't fret about it.
And that is the sense I've always gotten from Einstein's quotes. The universe is an amazing place that should create in us a sense of wonder no matter how it came to be.
Steve at 7:52PM on May 21st 2008
85. "Expertise in one area is no guarantee of competence or enlightenment in another."
Steve at 7:17PM on May 21st 2008
As long as you adhere to that principle when it comes to your own judgement then that's fine. If not, then you've technically voided your own opinion. Unless your expertise runs in the vein of the unknowable.
oneblood at 7:52PM on May 21st 2008
86. "thanks for playing.
Thomas J Gassett at 7:03PM"
Way to avoid my question dude... I hardly noticed that you didn't answer if you thought God was all infinite and stuff SIMPLY BECAUSE you thought that the universe WASN'T all infinite and stuff.
Did you not 'care to' give that one a go?
not-pboyfloyd at 8:47PM on May 21st 2008
87. "As long as you adhere to that principle when it comes to your own judgement then that's fine." - oneblood
Judgement?
not-pboyfloyd at 8:49PM on May 21st 2008
88. what a bunch of goof heads you athiest are!!! all D.D. was trying to say is Enstein believed in something besides it all happened by chance....there was something intelligent bringing it all into the world we have today . most of you seem so intelligent but you must not ever dream or wonder about ,why this planet? we would not be here if we didnt have the perfect atmosphere and i know the earth didnt have it at first, but we are here now and so far we are alone in the galaxy ,of course you could believe in aliens, but that also wouldn,t disprove a God (by the way my spelling might not be perfect the last time i bloged in here someone had to correct my spelling errors hope it made you feel warm inside)!!!!
gwen at 9:53PM on May 21st 2008
89. Why can't Dinesh ever be honest? He lies with his first sentence! All atheists know that Einstein was a spinozean-style pantheist.
Why does Dinesh hate the truth? Why must he always concoct lies and strawmen?
Knight_of_BAAWA at 9:36PM on May 21st 2008
90. 87. "As long as you adhere to that principle when it comes to your own judgement then that's fine." - oneblood
Judgement?
not-pboyfloyd at 8:49PM on May 21st
Oy vey. NOT eternal judgement.
oneblood at 9:45PM on May 21st 2008