Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Einstein Letter: Belief in God 'childish', Jews not chosen people.
War_Eagle
Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 472
Whoa. I'd never heard about this.
I can see where he's coming from. When you look at religions historically, it kind of puts our present time in perspective. Religions come and go. And morals from time to time change. There are some tried and true morals, but I don't think you need the threat of Godly punishment to incline people to follow them. Maybe something more along the lines of reason and logic might make them more desirable in todays climate.
| Belief in God 'childish,' Jews not chosen people: Einstein letter |  |
 |
|
| May 13 08:24 AM US/Eastern | |
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.
"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."
And he added: "As far as my experience goes, they are 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."
Previously the great scientist's comments on religion -- such as "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" -- have been the subject of much debate, used notably to back up arguments in favour of faith.
Powell said the letter being sold this week gave a clear reflection of Einstein's real thoughts on the subject. "He's fairly unequivocal as to what he's saying. There's no beating about the bush," he told AFP.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
All Rights Reversed
Comments
We all generally believe everything of one with authority, Einstein is a renowned scientist but so what? I don't care if he had an IQ of 300 I still wouldn't believe his fact God is a childish superstition and the letter kinda doesn't make a difference. Science is great but I do not think science itself can explain the reason for the existence of the universe.
We're all Geniuses. Most of us just don't know it.
God is not religion. I'm sure a lot of people realize that but they still have trouble separating the two. Even with the knowledge that the two are different it still takes time and great effort to ultimately make the divide. I thin a lot of that comes from the fear of finding out what it's like to leave safety behind.
I bet what he meant was that religion is childish. I'm not trying to put words in his mouth, just trying to understand what he was saying.
Oh, and you do kind of need to consider who he was. There is something to intelligence. There are things that he understood that no one before him even could dream up in their minds. Every once and a while someone comes along that is just levels above everyone else in brain power. It's not something you should find intimidating, instead I think you should consider them a gift to our enlightenment and give great consideration to what they say. It's people like him that turn stupidity and ignorance on its ear. I respect that.
I'm not saying you should blindly follow people like Einstein, just give them the deserved credit they are due.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
All Rights Reversed
I don't get why people try and take famous people and make their opinion on topics they're not famous for matter.
Sure Einstein practically changed the face of science in a lot of ways. There's no doubt he was a genius, at science.
Since when does that make him an expert on religion, or anything other than science though?
Seriously, Bill Gates may be a genius at programming, but there's a reason people don't ask his advice on fashion. Donald Trump may know how to make money, but would you ask him about hair care? Would you ask Mariah Carey advice on fixing your car? Would you ask Michael Jordan about how to direct a movie?
Let them give their opinions on what they're known for, rather than use their opinion on something they're not known for to try and prove our own points.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
How minimal can you make a persons life?
I find that a lot of people are usually pretty good at quite a few things. I am good at medicine but I can have a pretty good philosophical discussion with some of the philosophy professors at my University. I would hate to think that I was put here to only do one thing and I should not even consider anything else within my range of understanding or consideration.
And I find Science more a method than a field. It's like a discipline that can be used to seek out and find answers to explain many things. If Einstein was good at this technique, then I could see it being very applicable to religion and sociology.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
All Rights Reversed
I read a story the other day about Catholic priests who were also astronomers!
Whoa, they can do both of those things at one time? Yet you don't think that Einstein could possess the ability to have a viable religious opinion? Maybe that's because you don't agree with him?
Vatican Observatory
===============================
Ha! I don't believe half of what is told to me by people with authority.
Of course you won't believe his opinion (not fact) that God is a childish superstition....because you probably have the convenient blind faith that major religions preach. Science cannot explain the mysteries of the Universe...yet. Ten thousand years ago, no one could explain (correctly) how the sun appeared to move across the sky. One thousand years ago, you wouldn't have been able to find someone who knew what a star was made of. Just two hundred years ago, not one person had a clue what an x-ray was. Science is constantly growing...just as we are. Eventually, if our species survives, we will unlock the secrets of the Universe...we just have to learn like those before us.
If Einstein is so friggin brilliant, why do televangelists have a higher standard of living then nuclear physicists?
a scientist not believing in God?
no way!
genius' ive heard are borderline insane.
but to be fair, he was way ahead of the curve, as usual.
chips, dips chains & whips.
No way!
the religious ive heard are borderline insane.
pfft...
- LC
Einstein, while a scientific genius, did not have a monopoly on the world's knowledge. Isaac Newton, who was every bit Einstein's equal in scientific thought, had a very strong faith in God. Just something to think about.
Rdt2
3
c2
where:
r=density
p=pressure
G=constant of gravity
c=speed of light
d=distance
t=time
In deriving the equations of general relativity and applying them to the universe, Einstein came up with the equation pictured above. The left side of the equation represents acceleration. Since p is small and c2 is very large (right side of equation), this acceleration value is very close to zero. If 3p/c2 is zero, what does this tell us about the value of this expression? The universe is experiencing negative acceleration, or decelerating. If you solve more equations, you also determine that the universe is expanding. What, in nature can you think of that is simultaneously expanding and decelerating? An explosion. This was the first suggestion of what has come to be called the "Big Bang." Einstein did not like the implications of the Big Bang, which he thought implied the existence of a Creator. He spent many years modifying the original equations to introduce a cosmological constant "fudge factor" to attempt to eliminate the need for a Creator. This cosmological constant remained undetected until the late 1990’s, and then, it was many orders of magnitude smaller than that required to eliminate a beginning to the universe.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
- LC
I don't get what you're saying. I would expect Einstein to be a bit more open minded about religious doubt. He came years later than Newton. Newton was around while the world was somewhere in between the Enlightenment and still burning witches. It was a different time.
Newton also practiced alchemy. Something to think about.
===============================
Alchemy dealt with the practice of trying to transform ordinary metals into precious metals, so I don't know what the point of that statement is. Other than the fact that we now know that it's not possible.
Maybe people should stop trying to make assumptions and figure shit out instead.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
Alchemy dealt with the practice of trying to transform ordinary metals into precious metals, so I don't know what the point of that statement is. Other than the fact that we now know that it's not possible.
Back in Newtons time there were little to no scientific alternatives to religious dogma.Isaac Newton was born in 1643.
Charles Darwin was born in 1809
Newton may have found interest in alchemy, but lest we forget alchemy was a science with supernatural beliefs. It did not just include the supernatural, but chemistry(which at one point was referred to as alchemy), metallurgy, physics, and so on.
Newton being a scientist, why wouldn't he have found this interesting and worth dabbling in?
As in claiming that because of the time he had no other alternative but to believe, is bull. The man was not a sheep just following the herd because it was convenient. He had a very strong and firm belief in Christianity, it was more apart of him than his science, he was a true man of faith.
Another brilliant scientist who was a believer was Nikola Tesla. The man might as well have invented electricity in concerns to his vast understanding of it and his ability to harness it for the modern world. He was brilliant, modern, and still believed in God.
Just because one intelligent man is an unbeliever, does not mean that all intelligent men are.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
It's far from "bull". In that time "god did it" was the most used explenation, and it's much harder to convince yourself that it's not true when there is no alternative.
It's far from "bull". In that time "god did it" was the most used explenation, and it's much harder to convince yourself that it's not true when there is no alternative.
You did nothing to prove anything in argument of my statement, all you did was repeat what was already said, "It was popular, so therefor he must have believed."
Newsflash, atheism has existed as long as faith has. Darwin did not create atheism, he created evolution. And here's another nugget of information, during einsteins life, Christianity was still in it's prime. 1879 to 1955. Are you going to tell me that "God did it" was still not the most used explanation?
Newton was a brilliant man, he saw things other's did not. If he saw a lacking of existance of God, he would have stated as such. Instead the man spent his life dedicated to science, but firstly religious learning. To try to state he believed out of convenience, is of the utmost ignorance.
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
Unless he didn't have a death wish. I cannot pretend i know him personally but i doubt he was suicidal.
Unless he didn't have a death wish. I cannot pretend i know him personally but i doubt he was suicidal.
The man was not afraid of rocking the boat, he wrote a book with it's thesis on rejecting the trinity(Something hardly popular with the Catholic church).
This was not the inquisition, one did not need to be of a pretensive nature to live. He lived throughout the Age of Enlightenment for God's sake, not the Spanish inquisition.
How forbidden a thought that a brilliant man was also a man of faith...
"The greatest trick the devil played on humanity in the 20th century was convincing them that he didn't exist." (Paraphrasing) C.S. Lewis
"If a mother can kill her own child, what is left before I kill you and you kill me?" -Mother Teresa when talking about abortion after accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979
I'm just sick of all these people who can't make a point or argument for themselves, and thus have to say things like "Well Einstein said this about religion" or "Lindsay Lohan said this about politics" to make it out like they're right. Just because someone's good at one thing doesn't mean they're right about everything they say.
Many people say Thomas Jefferson is one of the most important figures in the US history, and his opinions on the US way of life stand in many places today, does that mean we should also follow his opinion on slavery? You know who else is famous? Tom Cruise, lets ask his opinion on religion, right?
These types of arguments are absolutely ludicrous. You find some random famous person and then, if their opinion matches yours, you tout them as an expert on the subject. This is bullcrap. Case in point, someone brought up Sir Isaac Newton. Arguably just as influential on science as Einstein was, he had a very strong faith in God. Yet someone tries to dismiss his opinion because it doesn't match with what they want. Do you not see how retarded and circular these arguments are?
"My famous person says there's no God"
"My famous person says there is"
"Your famous person practiced alchemy so his opinion isn't valid"
"Yeah well your famous person had frizzy hair, so his opinion isn't valid"
"Well this other famous person has one eye bigger than the other, and he says there isn't a God"
"Your famous person has the wrong eye that's bigger, that means they're wrong"
Do I need to keep going? Get your own damn opinions people. Stop relying on people you deify to give your opinion to you. This is the same stupid reason why everyone's so obsessed with Paris Hilton and Tom Cruise and Britney Spears, and so forth. You act like they're somehow better than you, that their opinion matters more than yours because they're famous. Get a reality check please.
"Because it's easier to nitpick something than to be constructive." -roach5000
Its an attempt to explain whats going on instead of making stuff up through fantasy.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
thank you.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
It's far from "bull". In that time "god did it" was the most used explenation, and it's much harder to convince yourself that it's not true when there is no alternative.
You did nothing to prove anything in argument of my statement, all you did was repeat what was already said, "It was popular, so therefor he must have believed."
Newsflash, atheism has existed as long as faith has. Darwin did not create atheism, he created evolution. And here's another nugget of information, during einsteins life, Christianity was still in it's prime. 1879 to 1955. Are you going to tell me that "God did it" was still not the most used explanation?
Newton was a brilliant man, he saw things other's did not. If he saw a lacking of existance of God, he would have stated as such. Instead the man spent his life dedicated to science, but firstly religious learning. To try to state he believed out of convenience, is of the utmost ignorance.
Nor did you prove anything to try to dispute it. Religion was the dominating explanation at the time, and in a sense a somewhat logical since there was no evolution alternative. I very much doubt that Isaac Newton was ever introduced to an alternative. It's not strange to see a designer in life when you don't understand natural selection and evolution.