Einstein was an Atheist

13 May

Full Article

LONDON (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 fueled much discussion, made the comments in response to a philosopher in 1954.

I especially love this quote:

‘”The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.”

This should settle the debate once and for all in regards to Einstein’s belief in God.



4 Responses to “Einstein was an Atheist”

  1. dazz May 13, 2008 at 5:42 pm #

    In his own words: “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.”
    Paging mister Dawkins…
    And also: “In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views.”
    There’s a debate about Einstein’s belief in God? I thought there was no debate about it, just like with Darwin. In that quote you give, Al isn’t denying God, he’s condemning the silly personification of God as a big bearded conservative in the clouds obsessed with rituals about eating meat on Fridays, masturbation and eating bread and wine that would make the worst obsessive compulsive look well-adjusted.
    Einstein believed in God as the primal first cause of the universe. For to deny the obvious mathematical principle/paradox of there being at some point a first cause uncaused is quite unscientific. There are two theories for what came before the Big Bang, both of which are impossible. There was either a spontaneous action, and effect with no cause, or eternity with no beginning, no first link in the chain of cause and effect. Also impossible.
    So matter which way you arrive at your origin beliefs, you are confronted with the unimaginable and the impossible. A wise man admits when something is beyond his comprehension. A fool denies what he can’t comprehend.
    Einie believed that science and religion are inexorably linked together. Personally, I think they’re the left and right hands of humanity, we use whichever one we favor to grasp what we’re reaching for. According to Al, “science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind”.
    It’s not about believing in loaves and fishes or whether or not God prefers people who chop off their foreskins. It’s about looking down the microscope and seeing subatomic particles reacting to being observed and making you wonder if you’ve caught God out.

    • bboyneko May 13, 2008 at 7:10 pm #

      Still you cling to the belief that Einstein believed in God even after this letter.

      • dazz May 13, 2008 at 7:50 pm #

        And you cling to the belief that he didn’t because of a letter criticising man’s tendancy to anthropomorphisize (or however ya spell that) a force beyond his understanding.
        I mean, seriously. You made the title of this post four simple words that twist the context to suit a bias. That’s tabloidesque material right there. And then when someone explains that things aren’t as black and white as that, you dismiss ’em with one line. Either you’re being as pigheaded as your perceived opponents, or so fantastically ironic that it went right over my head.
        I read the article, and you know I agree with just about everything the man said. In their original meaning, not the twisted one. For instance, they give the headline “Einstein says Jews not chosen people” and flirt with some vague anti-Semitism, when all he really says is how one race of people is no more better or worse than any other. Same thing “belief in God childish”, that phrase is never said ONCE. He says the word God is “nothing more than an expression and product of human weaknesses”, in other words people slapping a label on forces they don’t comprehend.
        The Bible childish? Perhaps. Fairy tales are childish. Roald Dahl books are childish. Harry Potter is childish. We still circulate these stories because of how important they are. Aesop’s Fables, for example, give moral warnings. And just because some parts of the Bible are ridiculous, like that Leviticus asshole, does that make the whole thing not worthwhile? What about stories like The Prodigal Son, The Good Samaritan, The Lost Sheep, The Two Sons, stories about hope and forgiveness and redemption and being a good person.
        And so because Leviticus is utter Hogwash and Dawkins is getting millions of people to suck his ego-cock by selling them a pseudo-religion of self-centered self-righteousness, we have to get people to stop reading a book that makes a lot of good suggestions because like any multi-authored work of fiction, it’s contradicted by other parts?
        AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, bullshit >_>
        Ah, what do I care. There’s no winning this debate, mostly because neither side is ever willing to admit the other might have something valid to say. Ah, here, just do me a favor and read this. Don’t worry, it won’t convert ya, just give you some suggestions for how to act towards others with your beliefs, whatever they are.

  2. asharak May 13, 2008 at 8:38 pm #

    I thought this was already common knowledge.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: