Well, see, to me, if this is merely an appeal to authority kind of argument for theism, a call to a ‘higher’ level of support, then it’s a good thing, just in the same way religiously motivated attacks on scientific results are a good thing – because they’re an admission of doubt, and doubt, to my kind of thinking, is the first step towards self-determined intellectual freedom.
Why do I think these things to be motivated by doubt? It’s simple, really – the truly faithful would have no need for them. Those who absolutely believe need no backup from whatever luminaries one can dig up and ascribe support to one’s views to; they know to be right in their faith, and no single person’s word or thought would even register on that scale, much less tip it. Similarly, a true believer would not attack a scientific result because it threatens the tenets of his faith, because he would know them to be unshakable, untouchable even, by our petty little machinations; his god would not have to hide in the gaps, but stand in glory so far over our little inconsequential ruminations that the thought of science ever bridging even the most minuscule range into that gap would be nothing but preposterous.
So, that’s why I always try to keep an open mind towards these threads, because maybe, sometimes, that doubt at the heart of them does crystallize into true questioning.
I think it’s clear that, in the event that Einstein entertained a belief in the existence of a god, it’s very clear that he didn’t believe in “God” - that is, he clearly disbelieved in the Christian god of the bible, or any interventionist god for that matter. So, to virtually everyone discussing the topic, Einstein was atheistic towards your god. (If you have one at all.)
Because believers think in terms of dogma handed down by prophets; in terms of declarations by leaders. Not facts or reason. Therefore, they try to tear down or co-opt the “leaders” of science or the “prophets” of atheism, under the assumption that doing so will “prove” their own views to be correct. They have serious difficulty grasping the fact that proving Einstein a theist or Dawkins a monster means nothing.
**ITR champion, ** what is the source for this Einstein quote?
It goes against other private letters and thoughts I’ve seen on Einstein’s personal beliefs. I’d like to see more of the surrounding quote as well if you have a cite for it.
I think I see ITR Champion’s confusion, here. He thinks that atheists blindly follow others, as theists do, instead of thinking for themselves. If he can prove that Albert Einstein was secretly a theist, then we’ll be forced to admit to ourselves that we secretly believe in God, as well.
I’ve contacted the maintenance department, and they are bringing up a comfortable chair for you to sleep in, along with a cot, pillow, & blanket in case you need to stretch out tonight. I’ve also ordered you a couple of pizzas (not sure whether you’re a vegetarian, so I thought I’d play it safe) and a six-pack of root beer. You may be waiting awhile, after all.
I’m not ITR Champion, and I think his form of witnessing is silly beyond belief, but apparently Einstein did say something similar to what he quoted, not that that actually validates the title of this thread in any way shape or form.
Of course, that was 25 years before his death. Hell, 25 years ago, I was a Methodist.
Again, not that any of this matters in any way, shape, or form. I admire many things about Einstein, but even if he had been a televangelist on the side, it wouldn’t suddenly make me believe in a god.
I believe it’s this particular one. Given his past threads (the Darwin one immediately springs to mind) I suspect he starts from the position that any good things must come from Christianity (and that which comes from Christianity is good), and that bad things must come from any “threats” to Christianity. It’s not enough that Dawkins, Darwin, or evolutionary psychology (to give another example) are wrong; they must be deliberately wrong, or perverse, or evil in some way. Not simply incorrect, but malignant.
I, too, would very much like some sources on the various quotes ITR’s put out, if possible (especially some context on the first claim of Dawkin’s up there). From my own knowledge, I would have said that Einstein could be said to be at most quite Deistic and at least a “we cannot know” agnostic.
Einstein clearly, explicitly and repeatedly denied any belief in a personal God (meaning any belief in God as a senient entity) and called it a “lie” that he’d ever expressed otherwise.
He did say this:
“I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.”
Einstein essentially used the word “God” metaphorically, if sometimes vaguely mystically or deistically, but he categorically denied ever using or believing it theistically. The OP is out to lunch on this one. Einstein more than once called theistic religions “childish.”
Not that it would matter, though. Einstin’s personal beliefs prove absoutely nothing one way or the other. Newton was a genius who was also a religious nutter and believed in alchemy. So what?
Basically, Einstein called himself an agnostic but denied that he was an atheist. However, he also said explicitly that he did not believe in a personal God.
He did say he believed in “Spinoza’s God” and that he was religious only in the sense of his belief in the profound beauty and structure of the physical world, not in the sense of believing in a God who cares about the fate of mankind.
Whether this counts as “believing in God” depends on how you define God, I guess.
I don’t see anywhere in this discussion that Dawkins has “insisted that Einstein was a pantheist” or that “In Dawkins’ world, there’s not a single Einstein quote which suggests other than that Einstein was an atheist and a pantheist.”
The closest Dawkins quote I find is “There is every reason to think that famous Einsteinisms like ‘God is subtle but he is not malicious’ or ‘He does not play dice’ or ‘Did God have a choice in creating the Universe?’ are pantheistic, not deistic, and certainly not theistic.”
No, Dawkins wasn’t making an appeal to authority, he was refuting the appeal to authority that Christians always make: cherry picking Einstein’s quotes in an attempt to show that even he, the Great Mind, believed in God.
