Einstein's Atheism Unmasked in Letter
Famous for claiming in support of his unified field theory that "God does not play dice with the universe" Albert Einstein's true sentiments concerning religion have come out in a letter up for auction today. Does this new letter settle the debate on Einstein's alleged religious views?
From AFP:
Albert Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people, in a letter to be sold in London this week, an auctioneer said Tuesday.
The father of relativity, whose previously known views on religion have been more ambivalent and fuelled much discussion, made the comments in response to a philosopher in 1954.
As a Jew himself, Einstein said he had a great affinity with Jewish people but said they "have no different quality for me than all other people".
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.
"No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this," he wrote in the letter written on January 3, 1954 to the philosopher Eric Gutkind, cited by The Guardian newspaper.
The German-language letter is being sold Thursday by Bloomsbury Auctions in Mayfair after being in a private collection for more than 50 years, said the auction house's managing director Rupert Powell.
In it, the renowned scientist, who declined an invitation to become Israel's second president, rejected the idea that the Jews are God's chosen people.
"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions," he said.
Lump the bum in with Carl Sagan and all the other arrogant atheists who believe that God doesn't exist because of their total faith in human senses and human reason. Duh. Science is not opposed to religion, but science can become an alternative religion.
A metaphysics of meaninglessness is still a metaphysical belief--and there is no way around such axiomatic starting points to knowledge. Duh.
From the Guardian:
An abridgement of the letter from Albert Einstein to Eric Gutkind from Princeton in January 1954, translated from German by Joan Stambaugh. It will be sold at Bloomsbury auctions on Thursday
... I read a great deal in the last days of your book, and thank you very much for sending it to me. What especially struck me about it was this. With regard to the factual attitude to life and to the human community we have a great deal in common.
... The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them.
In general I find it painful that you claim a privileged position and try to defend it by two walls of pride, an external one as a man and an internal one as a Jew. As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the priviliege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one. And the animistic interpretations of the religions of nature are in principle not annulled by monopolisation. With such walls we can only attain a certain self-deception, but our moral efforts are not furthered by them. On the contrary.
Now that I have quite openly stated our differences in intellectual convictions it is still clear to me that we are quite close to each other in essential things, ie in our evalutations of human behaviour. What separates us are only intellectual 'props' and 'rationalisation' in Freud's language. Therefore I think that we would understand each other quite well if we talked about concrete things. With friendly thanks and best wishes
Yours, A. Einstein
To say that any notion of "limited causation" (i.e. a break in the infinite chain of cause and effect, i.e. an uncaused cause, an unmoved mover) destroys all causality is simply logical rubbish. It is just as illogical to suggest that all causation is uncaused by any first cause. Logic does not grasp the infinite, and calling causation an infinite regression just pushes the goal posts back. That's the simple reason why the foundation of all knowledge comes down to a faith proposition of one sort or another. The arrogant aspect of atheists such as Sagan and Dawkins is to suggest that religious folks are retards: that makes the Sagans and Dawkins of the world just as intellectually perverse as their fundamentalist immam cousins.
This revelation of Einstein's real attitude is timely as I have just received a review copy of a collection of Carl Sagan writings on science qua religion entitled "The Varieties of Scientific Experience" (mocking the James monograph on religion).
On the back cover Dawkins proclaims: [Sagan] "left behind the petty, parochial, medieval world of the conventionally religious, left the theologians, priests and mullahs wallowing in their small-minded spiritual poverty. He left them behind, because he had so much more to be religious about. They have their Bronze-Age myths, medieval superstitions and childish wishful thinking. He had the universe."
Interesting, isn't it? Look at the incredible parallels in Dawkins' and Einstein's scientifically impoverished and spoiled-child "nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah!" rant against supernatural religion.
Sagan is welcome to his religion of the meaningless universe, that remains for him profoundly worth our attention somehow.
At least Lucretius knew how to be consistent!
D. Ox
From AFP:
Albert Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people, in a letter to be sold in London this week, an auctioneer said Tuesday.
The father of relativity, whose previously known views on religion have been more ambivalent and fuelled much discussion, made the comments in response to a philosopher in 1954.
As a Jew himself, Einstein said he had a great affinity with Jewish people but said they "have no different quality for me than all other people".
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.
"No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this," he wrote in the letter written on January 3, 1954 to the philosopher Eric Gutkind, cited by The Guardian newspaper.
The German-language letter is being sold Thursday by Bloomsbury Auctions in Mayfair after being in a private collection for more than 50 years, said the auction house's managing director Rupert Powell.
In it, the renowned scientist, who declined an invitation to become Israel's second president, rejected the idea that the Jews are God's chosen people.
"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions," he said.
Lump the bum in with Carl Sagan and all the other arrogant atheists who believe that God doesn't exist because of their total faith in human senses and human reason. Duh. Science is not opposed to religion, but science can become an alternative religion.
A metaphysics of meaninglessness is still a metaphysical belief--and there is no way around such axiomatic starting points to knowledge. Duh.
From the Guardian:
An abridgement of the letter from Albert Einstein to Eric Gutkind from Princeton in January 1954, translated from German by Joan Stambaugh. It will be sold at Bloomsbury auctions on Thursday
... I read a great deal in the last days of your book, and thank you very much for sending it to me. What especially struck me about it was this. With regard to the factual attitude to life and to the human community we have a great deal in common.
... The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These subtilised interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them.
In general I find it painful that you claim a privileged position and try to defend it by two walls of pride, an external one as a man and an internal one as a Jew. As a man you claim, so to speak, a dispensation from causality otherwise accepted, as a Jew the priviliege of monotheism. But a limited causality is no longer a causality at all, as our wonderful Spinoza recognized with all incision, probably as the first one. And the animistic interpretations of the religions of nature are in principle not annulled by monopolisation. With such walls we can only attain a certain self-deception, but our moral efforts are not furthered by them. On the contrary.
Now that I have quite openly stated our differences in intellectual convictions it is still clear to me that we are quite close to each other in essential things, ie in our evalutations of human behaviour. What separates us are only intellectual 'props' and 'rationalisation' in Freud's language. Therefore I think that we would understand each other quite well if we talked about concrete things. With friendly thanks and best wishes
Yours, A. Einstein
To say that any notion of "limited causation" (i.e. a break in the infinite chain of cause and effect, i.e. an uncaused cause, an unmoved mover) destroys all causality is simply logical rubbish. It is just as illogical to suggest that all causation is uncaused by any first cause. Logic does not grasp the infinite, and calling causation an infinite regression just pushes the goal posts back. That's the simple reason why the foundation of all knowledge comes down to a faith proposition of one sort or another. The arrogant aspect of atheists such as Sagan and Dawkins is to suggest that religious folks are retards: that makes the Sagans and Dawkins of the world just as intellectually perverse as their fundamentalist immam cousins.
This revelation of Einstein's real attitude is timely as I have just received a review copy of a collection of Carl Sagan writings on science qua religion entitled "The Varieties of Scientific Experience" (mocking the James monograph on religion).
On the back cover Dawkins proclaims: [Sagan] "left behind the petty, parochial, medieval world of the conventionally religious, left the theologians, priests and mullahs wallowing in their small-minded spiritual poverty. He left them behind, because he had so much more to be religious about. They have their Bronze-Age myths, medieval superstitions and childish wishful thinking. He had the universe."
Interesting, isn't it? Look at the incredible parallels in Dawkins' and Einstein's scientifically impoverished and spoiled-child "nah, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah!" rant against supernatural religion.
Sagan is welcome to his religion of the meaningless universe, that remains for him profoundly worth our attention somehow.
At least Lucretius knew how to be consistent!
D. Ox
... Always Open Trackbacks!
posted by Dumb Ox at 5/13/2008
Feedburner 
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home