 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
admin
Beloved Admin
Joined: 28 Sep 2000
Posts: 1749
Location: Macau, China
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:17 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Hi Plotinus,
That would be one excellent reason to read the book. Dawkins goes into great detail about Einstein's writings and direct rebuttals to people that said he believed in God. "God" as the God of Abraham, the way we most always use the word "God", he said specifically he did not believe in. Einstein's words.
I can write this out for you, but it's very lengthy. His book is over 400 pages long in fairly small print. I consider myself a strong read, but I have been reading this in chunks over the period of a month or more.
AtoZ - Scanning the table of contents in a bookstore?
I am not eloquent like Dawkins and don't debate well. But Dawkins arguments are strong. Difficult to talk about such a wide range of topics the book covers. Einstein being just one.
| Plotinus wrote: | Let me choose a typical passage from Richard Dawkins' book to explain my frustration with Dawkins' arguments.
| Dawkins wrote: | | Great scientists of our time who sound religious usually turn out not to be so when you examine their beliefs more deeply. This is certainly true of Einstein and Hawking. |
That Stephen Hawking is not religious is undeniable. How convenient that Einstein is dead.
The argument above is that Einstein's writings and statements seem superficially religious but are seen to be not religious upon closer examination. |
Dawkins shows just that. With Einsteins own words written specifically on the subject of his faith.
On Einstein. Here's from the book, where someone had written that Einstein believed in God because of his writings that referred to "God" - here are Einstein's own words:
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
And here is another quote:
The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive.
Then there are excerpts from religious leaders condemning Einstein for denying a personal God. They are quite bitter.
The section on Einstien goes over a whole twenty pages or more.
_________________
Cybermonsters (Most Beloved Admin)
Favorite Octopus Video! - My Site - Studio
Have a question or need help with your account? E-mail: forum @ askland.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atoz
Emperor of the Solar System
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Posts: 4189
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| admin wrote: |
.....
AtoZ - Scanning the table of contents in a bookstore?
.... |
atoz: I know, it sounds like a poor read!smile
But my A to Z scan is Laserlike:
Love Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation! smile
Here is AE on God & Religion -- on the other hand:
"'A legitimate conflict between Science and Religion cannot exist. …
Science without religion is lame,
Religion without science is blind.'
By his definition, Einstein himself was, of course, a deeply religious man.
So Einstein once wrote to explain his personal creed:
‘A religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance of those super-personal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation.’
Yet he lived by a deep faith – a faith not capable of rational foundation – that there are laws of Nature to be discovered.
His life long pursuit was to discover them.
His realism and his optimism are illuminated in this remark:
‘Subtle is the Lord,
but malicious he is not.'
(Raffinert ist der Herrgott
aber boshaft ist er nicht’).
When asked by a colleague what he meant by that, he replied:
‘Nature hides her secret because of her essential loftiness, but not by means of ruse’ (Die Natur verbirgt ihr Geheimnis durch die Erhabenheit ihres Wesens, aber nicht durch List’).
Albert Einstein,
vi, 319,
‘Subtle Is The Lord …’
The Science and The Life of Albert Einstein,
Abraham Pais. Oxford University Press, 1982.
“The longing to behold … pre-established harmony is the source of inexhaustible persistence and patience with which we see Planck devoting himself to the most general problems of our science without letting himself be deflected by goals which are more profitable and easier to achieve.
I have often heard that colleagues would like to attribute this attitude to exceptional will-power and discipline; I believe entirely wrongly so.
The emotional state which enables such achievements is similar to that of the religious person or the person in Love; the daily pursuit does not originate from a design or program but from a direct need.”
Albert Einstein, 26-27, SITL by Abraham Pais.
In the Love that is the SOE & the TOE:
The Source & Theory of Everything,
atoz
_________________
"The person who discovered The Law of Love
was a far greater scientist than any of our modern scientists."
MKGANDHI
“Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.”
Albert Einstein
“Love sought is good, but given unsought is better.”
William Shakespeare, 12th Night |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plotinus
Growing Lion
Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 894
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| admin wrote: | Hi Plotinus,
That would be one excellent reason to read the book. Dawkins goes into great detail about Einstein's writings and direct rebuttals to people that said he believed in God. "God" as the God of Abraham, the way we most always use the word "God", he said specifically he did not believe in. Einstein's words.
|
Thanks first for your thoughtful and lengthy reply.
| Quote: |
I can write this out for you, but it's very lengthy. His book is over 400 pages long in fairly small print. I consider myself a strong read, but I have been reading this in chunks over the period of a month or more.
|
I appreciate that. I bought a copy of the book and stayed up late reading it and thinking about his arguments. The arguments are essentially more detailed versions of ones I have already attributed to him. To be clear on my knowledge base: I have read one of his books on evolution, several articles by him, several articles about him including a discussion by Stephen J Gould, and some summaries and critics of his atheism by people such as Keith Ward, I have seen his documentary, which does follow the book a bit and now finally I have read most of the book.
| Quote: |
I am not eloquent like Dawkins and don't debate well. But Dawkins arguments are strong. Difficult to talk about such a wide range of topics the book covers. Einstein being just one.
|
I agree that Dawkins is eloquent and debates well. I would prefer not to try to win a debate simply on debating skills myself. Let the truth come out, I say, and I hope you agree.
| Quote: |
| Plotinus wrote: | Let me choose a typical passage from Richard Dawkins' book to explain my frustration with Dawkins' arguments.
(omitted)
The argument above is that Einstein's writings and statements seem superficially religious but are seen to be not religious upon closer examination. |
Dawkins shows just that. With Einsteins own words written specifically on the subject of his faith.
|
Somewhat selectively chosen, I might add. The words of Einstein that most undermine Dawkins' case are not listed in the book.
| Quote: |
On Einstein. Here's from the book, where someone had written that Einstein believed in God because of his writings that referred to "God" - here are Einstein's own words:
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
|
But this is why I suggested that Dawkins was setting up a straw man. No one is arguing that Einstein believed in a personal God. Nor that Einstein believed in a supernatural God.
| Quote: |
And here is another quote:
The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive.
|
Again agreed. But Dawkins would have Einstein allied with atheism for this reason?
| Quote: |
Then there are excerpts from religious leaders condemning Einstein for denying a personal God. They are quite bitter.
The section on Einstien goes over a whole twenty pages or more. |
I agree it is quite lengthy. But there is a reason for that. Dawkins knows that this is the crucial part of his argument. His argument depends heavily upon the idea that there is something called a "conventional" God and that he is attacking the conventional God, not Einstein's God. If he fails in convincing the reader of this at the very beginning of the book then the rest of his argument throughout the book will fall flat.
There is no doubt that Einstein's view of God was atypical. However, that does not prove Dawkins' point. For example, he must also demonstrate that almost everybody else believes in a God that is inherently supernatural in character. He needs us to believe that the conventional God is one who, say, can temporarily suspend the law of gravity if need be to answer the prayer of some person. Now many people believe this I am sure. But to make his case that God is a delusion, he needs all theists to believe this sort of thing. So he is at pains in the beginning of the book to define theism in such a way that Einstein is an atheist. OK, then. But his surgery also manages to exclude some very big names in Protestant theology. According to Dawkins Paul Tillich, who did not believe in a supernatural God, was also an atheist, despite being one of the greatest theologians of the 20th century.
He is a quote about (and indirectly from) Einstein that I did not find in Dawkins:
| Quote: |
Einstein always protested against being called an atheist. In a conversation with Prince Hubertus of Lowenstein, for example, he declared "What really makes me angry is that they ["people who say there is no God"] quote me for support of their views."
|
Einstein and Religion, by Max jammer, Princeton University Press, 1999, p 150.
_________________
One would never discover the limits of soul, should one traverse every road -- so deep a measure does it possess.
Heraclitus, fragment 45, quoted in Diogenes Laertius 9.7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plotinus
Growing Lion
Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 894
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ana wrote: | | Plotinus wrote: | | What books are you reading promoting theism? |
Does it matter? You wanted a reason to read a book - I gave you one.
As for my reading material, since for some reason you care, I'm currently reading The Hobbit. After that I'm considering picking up where I left off on American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips (it's not my book but I currently have access to it again). Before that, I read Celestine Prophecy by James Redfield. |
I care what all my friends are reading. 
Could I recommend Rethinking Christianity by Keith Ward to you?
I'm fond of The Hobbit, although I like the LOTR trilogy even more. Favourite passage: when Gandalf tries to explain to Frodo why he should not wish for the death of Gollum (in FOTR).
_________________
One would never discover the limits of soul, should one traverse every road -- so deep a measure does it possess.
Heraclitus, fragment 45, quoted in Diogenes Laertius 9.7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ana
King of the Jungle
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: BC
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Plotinus wrote: | | Ana wrote: | | Plotinus wrote: | | What books are you reading promoting theism? |
Does it matter? You wanted a reason to read a book - I gave you one.
As for my reading material, since for some reason you care, I'm currently reading The Hobbit. After that I'm considering picking up where I left off on American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips (it's not my book but I currently have access to it again). Before that, I read Celestine Prophecy by James Redfield. |
I care what all my friends are reading.
Could I recommend Rethinking Christianity by Keith Ward to you?
I'm fond of The Hobbit, although I like the LOTR trilogy even more. Favourite passage: when Gandalf tries to explain to Frodo why he should not wish for the death of Gollum (in FOTR). |
Cool. I will look into this Rethinking Christianity. I hear that the LotR trilogy is better too, but I thought I should start at the beginning of the story. I also want to read The God Delusion. I just haven't been to the bookstore lately.
_________________
Truth doesn't care about theology, and theology doesn't care about truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
admin
Beloved Admin
Joined: 28 Sep 2000
Posts: 1749
Location: Macau, China
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
theseldomscene
Banned
Joined: 17 Mar 2005
Posts: 7817
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ana wrote: | | I'm currently reading The Hobbit. |
 ...far out... ...i will not even begin to tell how far out it is you are doing so... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atoz
Emperor of the Solar System
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Posts: 4189
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanx, Admin, for sharing,--I already have this reference, --- but it is the thought that counts!smile
The details just spell out even more clearly how religion and science are inter-related and interconvertible.
Here are a few excerpts:
“But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it cosmic religious feeling.
It is very difficult to elucidate this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it, especially as there is no anthropomorphic conception of God corresponding to it.
The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole.
The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear at an early stage of development, e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learned especially from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer, contains a much stronger element of this.
The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image; so that there can be no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another.
How can cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another, if it can give rise to no definite notion of a God and no theology? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it.
We thus arrive at a conception of the relation of science to religion very different from the usual one. When one views the matter historically, one is inclined to look upon science and religion as irreconcilable antagonists, and for a very obvious reason.
It is therefore easy to see why the churches have always fought science and persecuted its devotees. On the other hand, I maintain that the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific research. Only those who realize the immense efforts and, above all, the devotion without which pioneer work in theoretical science cannot be achieved are able to grasp the strength of the emotion out of which alone such work, remote as it is from the immediate realities of life, can issue. What a deep conviction of the rationality of the universe and what a yearning to understand, were it but a feeble reflection of the mind revealed in this world, Kepler and Newton must have had to enable them to spend years of solitary labor in disentangling the principles of celestial mechanics! Those whose acquaintance with scientific research is derived chiefly from its practical results easily develop a completely false notion of the mentality of the men who, surrounded by a skeptical world, have shown the way to kindred spirits scattered wide through the world and through the centuries. Only one who has devoted his life to similar ends can have a vivid realization of what has inspired these men and given them the strength to remain true to their purpose in spite of countless failures. It is cosmic religious feeling that gives a man such strength. A contemporary has said, not unjustly, that in this materialistic age of ours the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people.”
AE. The following article by Albert Einstein appeared in the New York Times Magazine on November 9, 1930 pp 1-4. It has been reprinted in Ideas and Opinions, Crown Publishers, Inc. 1954, pp 36 - 40. It also appears in Einstein's book The World as I See It, Philosophical Library, New York, 1949, pp. 24 - 28.
This ties in with what RD unwittingly says:
"A universe with a God would like quite different from a universe without one. A physics, a biology where there is a God is bound to look different. So the most basic claims of religion are scientific. Religion is a scientific theory."
Richard Dawkins
"For while religion prescribes brotherly love in the relations among the individuals and groups, the actual spectacle more resembles a battlefield than an orchestra. Everywhere, in economic as well as in political life, the guiding principle is one of ruthless striving for success at the expense of one's fellow. men. This competitive spirit [read: 'This spirit of Hate for self as last or as loser] prevails even in school and, destroying all feelings of human fraternity and cooperation, conceives of achievement not as derived from the love for productive and thoughtful work, but as springing from personal ambition and fear of rejection.
There are pessimists who hold that such a state of affairs is necessarily inherent in human nature; it is those who propound such views that are the enemies of true religion, for they imply thereby that religious teachings are utopian ideals and unsuited to afford guidance in human affairs. The study of the social patterns in certain so-called primitive cultures, however, seems to have made it sufficiently evident that such a defeatist view is wholly unwarranted. Whoever is concerned with this problem, a crucial one in the study of religion as such, is advised to read the description of the Pueblo Indians in Ruth Benedict's book, Patterns of Culture. Under the hardest living conditions, this tribe has apparently accomplished the difficult task of delivering its people from the scourge of competitive spirit and of fostering in it a temperate, cooperative conduct of life,[read: the spirit of Love of self as both first and last, winner and loser] free of external pressure and without any curtailment of happiness.
The interpretation of religion, as here advanced, implies a dependence of science on the religious attitude, a relation which, in our predominantly materialistic [read:haterialistic] age, is only too easily overlooked. While it is true that scientific results are entirely independent from religious or moral considerations, those individuals to whom we owe the great creative achievements of science were all of them imbued with the truly religious conviction that this universe of ours is something perfect and susceptible to the rational striving for knowledge. If this conviction had not been a strongly emotional one and if those searching for knowledge had not been inspired by Spinoza's Amor Dei Intellectualis, they wouid hardly have been capable of that untiring devotion which alone enables man to attain his greatest achievements.
AE, A response to a greeting sent by the Liberal Ministers' Club of New York City. Published in The Christian Register, June, 1948. Published in Ideas and Opinions, Crown Publishers, Inc., New York, 1954.
Hope that helps.
with the Cosmic Constant of Universal Love in both religion and science and all aspects of life,
atoz
_________________
"The person who discovered The Law of Love
was a far greater scientist than any of our modern scientists."
MKGANDHI
“Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.”
Albert Einstein
“Love sought is good, but given unsought is better.”
William Shakespeare, 12th Night |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
