Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."
@scarwarsnow You're an idiot who can't even write a complete sentence. (i.e. "He was fuckin' moron.."). I'm not sure what crack-pipe website or source you got your information on, but you are the epitome of how true knowledge is being convoluted and distorted on the internet.
@athltspirit As you have intercepted me and its you who replied to my comment. You must not care if you feel you are right, as i do not care about your views on this motherfucker called einstein. Shove your thoughts and ur grammar in ur ass. Einstein was an asshole, just like you are.
I like how you say reply to all evolutionists as if it were a minority or something. Or your trying to prove creationism with this video? Hello.... Evolution is fact.
@imakegirlsperculate@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
@scarwarsnow communism isn't exactly evil. What it started out to be, socialism was indeed the best ideology ever but like many things. It turned sour.
@imakegirlsperculate Communism is an impractical and non sense thought where everybody is treated equally. Given the inherent human tendencies and characteristics of life where no 2 men are equal under any circumstances. Communism is an aberration and this aberration was actually implemented by the Soviet Union, where millions died for resisting this evil ideology. Idealistic definitions of democracy sounds too good but again the implementation has rendered the mankind into utter darkness.
@scarwarsnow its better than fascism. And socialism, not communism is perfect. Of course at out point in evolution impossible, but you have to keep doing something to get to that perfection, even if you never reach it. Marks idea was that perfect utopia, distorted by the likes of stalin and such. Communism isn't evil, it's only as evil as it's leader. If Ghandi was a communist leader you wouldn't call it bad. I'm not pro communist, i'm just not american.
@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
@imakegirlsperculate@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
@imakegirlsperculate@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
@imakegirlsperculate@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine. And you sound like a communist casualty
@imakegirlsperculate@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
In a 1954 letter to Eric Gutkind, a year before Einstein's death, he wrote: "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."
In another letter he wrote: "If something is in me that can be called religious, then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as science can reveal it."
Stopped it about 1 minute in after you said something about him finding "intelligence in the universe". This is FALSE. Again. Look up Spinoza's God. It's not a personal God, nor an intelligent being in outer space. It's an observation that Nature and the universe itself, and the laws therein, are what he would call God. In essence, Einstein was a Agnostic Pantheist, which still falls firmly within the realm of 'Atheist', by definition. Again, educate yourself.
@pestmanpat Sorry if I misunderstood the meaning of this video. But your 'underbar' message could have been a bit clearer, as well as many of those quotes from Einstein that could have been taken for ANY context. Einstein even said himself that he hated giving his opinions on 'God' and 'Religion' for this exact reason... That people would quote mine the hell out of it, and use it to their benefit.
There's certainly no evidence of such a thing. The default position is Atheist in reality. A 'non-belief' in any Gods or anything supernatural. The clear way to approach someone who is talking about a God(s), is to ask them to define said God(s) first. Then, a critical analysis, and the evidence for God(s) is usually, if not always found wanting. I'm honestly surprised there's still Theists today's world with all that we know now, and will know.
@LordBLB Yet a brilliant mind such as Einstein did see evidence of some kind of intelligence in the workings of the cosmos.The default position should be agnostic not atheist.There is real evidence that could be interpreted as intelligent design.
The notion that the universe sprang from nothing is in my mind much harder to account for than ID
Define god ? Good question.For the purpose of this discussion i define God as
Yet, to put something that "looks" like intelligence (I don't think it does) at the feet of something that cannot be proven. To assume a "creator" is to assume something so complex that IT, in itself, MUST have been created. You're placing yourself firmly in an unending loop of Cause and Effect. And to simply state that this "God" is eternal, and does not need a creator, is ignoring the fact that the same can be said about the Universe itself.
@pestmanpat "Einstein did see some kind of intelligence"
He did not attribute that observation to some "Invisible Sky Daddy". Which is why I said he was an Agnostic Pantheist. A Pantheist believes the Universe itself, is God. Yet we do not claim it is intelligent nor sentient. It operates within the laws that exist, and they are never broken. Like Carl Sagan said: "We are made of star-stuff".
@LordBLB He did not believe in any of mans interpretations of who or what God is.
Again watch my video.In it Einstein claims that he does not think he is a pantheist.
He then give an example of a little boy in a library who does not understand the origin or the language in those books but he does understand they were the result of an intelligent mind.I believe Einstein was agnostic as to the nature of that intelligence but as far as the existence of a creator he was a theist or deist.
@pestmanpat By Einstein's own explanation of his beliefs, he was a Pantheist (whether admitted or not). You can extract his words to match this very definition from your own video of his quotes. Perhaps Einstein did not understand what it means to be a Pantheist? After all, he wasn't a genius at everything. Only physics/math.
Here's the definition:
pan·the·ism (n) 1 : a doctrine or idea that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe.
@pestmanpat "if you think pantheism is a belief in an unconscious force"
I just gave you the verbatim definition from Meriam-Webster Dictionary Online for Pantheist. The definition I gave you, is what Einstein was, and matches what he said he thought 'God' was. Whether you think he was or not is irrelevant.
"He repeatedly refers to this force as intelligent"
@pestmanpat Your mistake is assuming the context of his words, when in reality Einstein constantly chose his words carefully. If you really READ what he says, you'll see the context, and also see they he intentionally left things broad. He did not have a working definition of what he thought 'God' was. Only that he saw 'something' in the universe as a whole. He never once defined that 'God'. So that's where we'll have to agree to disagree. I think he was at least a Pantheist, not just.
Amazing how evos can take what is so obvious, and if it doesn't fit their agenda, scold you for it's use. I have a page on my blog with Einstein's thoughts. Which are so similar to mine.
Thanks for the great vid. This is so much better than so many evo-vids, which automatically get *****. This is a *****. Good music too. And thanks for the look at mine.
Why in the info do you refer them to Evolutionist? Seems like you are referring to Atheist. The world and life on it did evolve, not just atheist know this, religious followers do as well. Why do people argue over his quotes? He died 55 years ago; none of us knew him personally. Study his work, not his quotes. Oh, and people need to stop using "the child in the library" example. To atheist, that just leaves the question, Where did "god" come from, then? Study his work, not his quotes
Most if not all atheists are evolutionists.Rejecting a supernatural being they look to cosmic chemical and biological evolution as a way to account for origin.
re: Where did "god" come from, then?
God is by definition without a beginning.
If you believe that time began with the big bang as most atheists do then you as an atheist also need to explain an action before time.A change in states where some cause acted to create time.
Most scientist are then what you call "evolutionists". A person can believe in a god and accept evolution. This goes for most of the people I know, and many of which are church goers. I'm an atheist and I don't except the Big Bang. Much of Einstein's and others' work suggest the Big Bang, though I feel like there are many more secrets to be unlocked. Arguing quotes is bad. Einstein once thought the universe was static until Edwin Hubble changed his views. Views change, quotes don't.
Arguing quotes that are not yours is bad. Sharing quotes is ok, but you never knew the man. You can only assume. Like I said before, a man's views over years can change. Making their quotes no longer reflecting their current view.
Default position? Maybe were you live, not so much here; other way around.
Does it really matter if he believed in a god or not? He gave us a new understanding of, energy, light, gravity, and gave birth to quantum mechanics. His work is what is important.
@pestmanpat Life evolved. Fact. You can't appeal to Hawking's authority in another video and then dismiss this part of his understanding. The theory of evolution explains the origin of species. The idea that life followed non-biological chemical reactions is too a theory, subscribed to by Hawkings, and, if erroneuos, does not then become proof of God. cont...
@pestmanpat Doesn't your Hawkings video advocate the idea that time began with the big bang?
"God is by definition without a beginning" - Elsewhere, Einstein makes clear that we cannot conceive of what we call God. We cannot, therefore, define him/her/it. Einstein embraced the unknown.
These are Einstein's views, and he is certainly welcome to them, as is anyone. But this does not constitute evidence as the only thing demonstrated is a conclusion supported by Einstein's quotes, not physical evidence.
And I notice you included Einstein's views on Quantum Mechanics, which I also mentioned. Quantum Theory was the bane to Einstein's universal idea of God, which is why he struggled against it so hard. In the end Einstein didn't show it to be wrong, and it remains to this day.
"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,"
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.EINSTEIN
way to cherry pick and quote mine!! if you actually check all those quotes and read them in their context you will see that your interpretation is way off the mark. Go check Wikiquote and see the full breadth of his statements...
This video is about the same as saying Darwin thought the eye was designed then listing that one quote mine that is commonly misused by creationists.
Apparently it is your interpretation. What Einstein said in the rest of the quote is a dig at world religions. It in no way negates his statement about not believing in a God who "interferes in the course of events". This is very clearly and plainly about cause and effect EVENTS, and the concept of determinism in the natural world.
Here's a second, even clearer iteration of the same idea: "The idea of a Being who interferes with the sequence of events in the world is absolutely impossible."
Again i ask you to look at the following line of your new quote
Neither the religion of fear nor the social-moral religion can have any hold on him.
The sequence of events in the world refers to the moral decisions man makes the actions we take and the outcome of our actions.Einstein could not conceive of a creator who intervenes in our lives weather we do good or bad.
Nothing whatsoever to do with evolution cosmic chemical or biological
That line is not part of my newest quote, only the older one.
Einstein, a physicist is clearly referring to the problem of a deterministic universe if God interferes. He's talking about the ability for science to follow events back in time and figure out how they unfolded by understanding events in the present. This is impossible with a God who fiddles with His creation after He has initially made it. Einstein is making a sort of deistic claim about the nature of the universe.
For any one who is pervaded with the sense of causal law in all that happens, who accepts in real earnest the assumption of causality, the idea of a Being who interferes with the sequence of events in the world is absolutely impossible. Neither the religion of fear nor the social-moral religion can have any hold on him. As quoted in Has Science Discovered God
"causal law in ALL that happens" - get that? God doesn't interfere with ANYTHING, not just human moral decisions.
This isn't that hard to grasp. If you were familiar with Einstein's history of scientific battles and discoveries, you'd see that Einstein battled with the quantum physicists because he believed EVERYTHING is causal, and nothing left to chance. God doesn't play dice because EVERYTHING is predetermined and the causal chain can be studied back to the beginning without interference.
According to my understanding of Einstein's views from what he has said about God and the universe, God created a singularity knowing full well the sorts of laws and complexity that would result. Additionally, Einstein felt that God was in a sense represented by these natural laws - that studying science was a way to know God.
To Einstein, the brilliance of the Creation (and thus, the Creator) was that it never required interference to build complexity and beauty.
if you mean interference in tinkering with design then no.Einstein did not believe in an experimental designer God.But if you mean interference in the consequences of our decisions then your right.Einstein did not belive in such a God.
No, I meant interference in His original design. I'm saying Einstein thought an intelligent being Created the Universe, and then left it alone - no interference of any kind after the initial start.
That would be a deist... so instead of trying to be all flashy and smart looking... why dont you just say Einstein was a deist... simplicity is key to guarantee that everyone understands your point.
Because the second part of my comment goes way beyond simple deism. I think Einstein would not have considered himself simply a deist.
Simplicity is great - we should make things as simple as possible, but no simpler. I'm not trying to "be all flashy and smart", just very clear (especially after several rounds of back and forth with pestmanpat on Einstein's beliefs).
You are wrong to conflate science with Einsteins beliefs in a non-interfering god. Scientists are free to believe all sorts of things that they have not used science to test. His comments about religiosity and science are about scientists having a different perspective, not about using the scientific method to test that.
Einstein's God never "interferes in the course of events" (in his words), so he couldn't have agreed with your creation ideas,
So if a guy thats smart in some areas but socially handicapped in others, like einstein believes one thing it must be true? Stop hyping the guy, he made some good discoverys but if he didnt someone else would later, if that guy believed santa...SANTA MUST BE REAL RIGHT???
There has been much debate as to Einsteins views on God. hence the video.
your logic is pretty silly his belief in god is based on facts and observations that we all can look at for ourselves.I dont follow einstein as a guru but i do find his views interesting. is that OK !
he didn't believe in santa, learn how to argue before you try. if you think you know better then Einstein on issues like creation, then by all means, believe what you want. but i have to correct you on one point:
"So if a guy thats smart in some areas..."
please understand, that he was much much more then "smart"
The reason why there are contradicting quotes from Einstein regarding God. Is because his views didn't remain the same from his youth to his old age. Prior to Einstein's discoveries the prevailing view amongst most scientists was that time & space were eternally existent. Thus, there had never been a point of creation. But Einstein's work revealed the finite nature of time & space. Most of the scientific community, including Einstein didn't like the implications of a creation point causing the
beginning of the universe's existence. So dismayed was Einstein that he labored in the effort to disprove his own discoveries, but to no avail. Then, when Einstein was invited by Hubble to the California observatory to witness his "red shift" discovery is when Einstein finally conceded and said - "I am no longer interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I simply want to know how he created the universe. I want to know his thoughts"
A will is one of many necessary 'ingredients' (obviously there are other requirements... memory, self reflection, etc.) for intelligence. Without it you do not have this. For instance, computers are not intelligent. Yet.
Again... ""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.""
Do you know the difference between a supernatural definition of god and a natural definition of god? If you define all the collective energy (i.e. everything that exists) in the the cosmos as 'god' but do not assign a 'consciousness' or 'will' (my 2nd quote) to it, why bother calling it god?
""It was of course a lie, what you read about my religious beliefs, 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."" - ALBERT EINSTEIN
""It seems to me that the idea of a personal god is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere."" - ALBERT EINSTEIN
Well just wanted to say I made a post of course but you deleted it -author of this video is not only very wrong einstein would be rolling in his grave. Einstein believed in spinozas god - a methaphore for the universe, and the spirit of exploration and amazement - not abrahamic god.
You claim Einstein believed in a God who designed nature, yet I already gave you a quote from Einstein, which I post here for the third and final time
"I cannot then believe in this concept of an anthropomorphic God who has the powers of interfering with these natural laws." (Einstein)
This is only compatible with pantheism or panentheism.
Him saying that he doesn't know if he can call himself a pantheist is neither affirming nor denying. He may have called himself a panentheist if he knew.
Heres the next paragraph you didnt quote If there is any such concept as a God, it is a subtle spirit, not an image of a man that so many have fixed in their minds. In essence, my religion consists of a humble admiration for this illimitable superior spirit that reveals itself in the slight details that we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds .
In the following quote he actually attributes the creation of natural law to an intelligent agent
rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law which reveals an "INTELLIGENCE" of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.
After his analogy about the child in the library, he goes on to explain "We see a universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws... I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not two separate things."
I don't see any debate as to whether Spinoza's god is the most accurate depiction of Einstein's belief in god.
"I can understand your aversion to the use of the term 'religion' to describe an emotional and psychological attitude which shows itself most clearly in Spinoza... I have not found a better expression than 'religious' for the trust in the rational nature of reality that is, at least to a certain extent, accessible ot human reason." (Einstein)
He found evidence of God not in ancient scripture but in the laws of physics and his limited observations of the universe.This is why Einstein has been called the father of intelligent design.
Well I can't argue with someone who injects their beliefs. It's quite clear to me that Einstein felt a kinship with the Spinoza depiction of god more than any other. But if you want to think that you and Einstein believe in the same type of god, then that's your business... whatever.
My stance on intelligent design? I can't take a stand on that, since I don't know. It's an interesting question though. The only sense in which I would think intelligent design were possible is if it was ultimately necessary in fulfillment of some requirement of something. It gets pretty philosophical at that point. But I don't have any definitive belief with regards to that. However I am no creationist.
If we work on the premise that there is no intelligence involved then our research reflects this.We seek to explain origin without direction or purpose.If we could consider that this universe is the result of a designer then our research would reflect that premise and we may find good supporting evidence.Main stream science is completely bias on this and as a a result there is zero research done in the field of intelligent design.
He sure was'nt a PanTHEIST , as he was not theist, NOR Atheist. He said he believed in Spinozas impersonal god, "a supreme reasoning power". So, if he believed this, and believed the Universe was infinite, he was definately a PanDeist or PanenDeist.
Those terms were'nt really in use yet, but his views are consistent with them.
"That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."-Einstein.
I think that when you take all the things he said about his beliefs, about not beliving in a personal god and finding such belief childish; and using the word God to refer to this superior reasoning power that's revealed in the incomprehensible universe, etc. And that he never said and to my knowledge denied beeing both atheist and pantheist, that he was a Deist, more specifically a PanenDeist or PanDeist. Reasoning power= an intelligent organizing force of some myterious kind.
He sure was'nt a PanTHEIST , as he was not theist, NOR Atheist. He said he believed in Spinozas impersonal god, "a supreme reasoning power". So, if he believed this, and believed the Universe was infinite, he was definately a PanDeist or PanenDeist.
Those terms were'nt really in use yet, but his views are consistent with them.
"That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."-Einstein
Oh he believed in cosmic and biological evolution indeed. Einsteins god was a PanenDeistic or PanDeistic{not theist/pantheist/panentheist} one, he excepted all the findings of science. And though he may have waxed philosophical about an intelligent designer of sorts, he rejected and would today reject intelligent design science{pseudo-science}.
I've not read any Einstein aside fom the quotes of his beliefs. So I cou;d'nt provide those. I'm sure there's probably something somewhere. And even if there isn't I think it's probbaly safe to assume that because Einstein was a legit scientists and evolution was established scientific fact that he most likely accepted it.
Einstein Albert the little patent clerk in Switzerland,the fulfilment of Isaac Newton"s gravity,which took Einstein over 200 years to explain --and the E=mc2
the theory that space and time are relative concepts rather than absolute concepts
He was a scientist but had no more of a clue, was there or wasn't there a higher power
His brother Frank had as much knowledge of this perplexity ?
None of this has any relevance to the point of this video. That is that Einstein concluded that the design of the universe is the result of intelligence.
He makes no reference as to the identity of this intelligence.
Your point that Einstein is not referring to a god which is above or superior to nature is interesting.You see i believe that the first
cause was an intelligent form of dynamic energy who gave of itself to create everything.
Therefore everything is made of the stuff of God.
It is difficult to discuss the beginning of the universe without mentioning the concept of God. My work on the origin of the universe is on the borderline between science and religion, but I try to stay on the scientific side of the border. It is quite possible that God acts in ways that cannot be described by scientific laws. [Stephen Hawking]
Einstein said you could call him an agnostic. He said this essentially because when he refers to god, it is really an unnecessary label that is only being used for convenience, since we already have a label for what he is talking about: nature.
Einstein has said that Buddhism is one religion that could fit the bill for a cosmic religion for the future. Buddhism also has no need for the god label.
I took a look at your profile and i see your only 22.
That explains why you would announce yourself with such a foolish comment. If there is any substance to your claim i would be happy to discuss it with you.
And pointing out my age does absolutely nothing to counter what I said. However it does seem to cooborate my claim that you're feeble minded.
I'll continue with the expectation that your next comment won't be so disappointing. It is well established in Einstein's own words that he did not believe in a personal god at all, so if you are trying to argue that he did in this video, then you are certainly wrong.
True. Had you been 50 years old and made that comment it would be just as immature.
You see if you had done any research into this video and actually watched it you would know the fundamental difference between belief in a "personal God" that is one described by man and belief in an unknown creator.
The context of Einsteins thoughts can be seen in his illustration of the child in the library.
watch it again and if you
want to dispute the authenticity or context of his quotes go ahead.
Actually I already knew the difference between belief in a personal god and that of an unknown creator. Maybe you shouldn't write in the comment section for this video that this is a reply to "YOUTUBERS WHO HAVE MADE A GREAT DEAL OF EINSTEIN QUOTES DENOUNCING RELIGION AND A PERSONAL GOD" if you aren't trying to argue for his belief in a personal god.
Einstein said he believes in a Spinoza's God, which is saying that god is all of nature, not above or superior to it.
Einstein uses the word god since it is the best word to use when he is describing his personal feelings of admiration and wonder at the harmony in nature.
Just like the way he would say "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", where he calls himself religious even though he is of no religion, simply because it is the most appropriate word to describe his feelings.
This video was created to address all of your points here.And to show the context of what he believes. HENCE THE TITLE.Most people equate his rejection of a personal god with rejection of an intelligent designer and then jump a step further to claim he did not believe in a god at all and that he only spoke of God in metaphor.This is clearly mistaken.
The little boy in the library proves his belief in an intelligent thinking being "someone must have written the books"
A thinking god IS a personal god. A personal god is a deity that can be related to as a person. Thinking is related to that of a person or self conscious being.
"I think, therefore I am." - Descartes
Einstein DID NOT advocate a personal god (no thinking, self conscious being!) It is clear from his own words that he was fascinated with a Spinoza's God, which IS NATURE.
Einstein believed the mind and body were inseparable, and yet you try to say that Einstein believed in a non-physical, thinking god?... You call yourself a theist, and you try to inject your beliefs into the words of someone who never called himself a theist? You are the only one taking things out of context.
"Only the individual can think, and thereby create new values for society, nay, even set up new moral standards to which the life of the community conforms..." (A. Einstein)
"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." (Albert Einstein)
"I cannot conceive of a God who ... has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves." (A. Einstein)
"An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension, nor do I wish it otherwise; such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls." (Einstein)
"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."
Its debatable if spinoza was an atheist or a pantheist.
when asked if he believed in spinozas God Einstein said this
"I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist ".
We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books.
He liked Spinozas view that God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists.
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists..." (Einstein)
You take his use of the word intelligence out of context. It is the best word to use to describe the harmony and structure he saw in the universe. He is not referring to an intelligence like that which humans possess...
And I don't see why you cited the Einstein quote where he says it makes him angry when people claim he didn't believe in god. I've said he believes in Spinoza's god.
1.capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity.
2. manifestation of a high mental capacity
Intelligence is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly
I don't think an illimitable spirit and/or intelligence means that Einstein was not a pantheist or panentheist. This illimitable spirit and intelligence of Einstein's god are nature. The reasoning, or intelligence, come into play in the question of whether there are fundamental, indestrubtible truths which must be obeyed concerning the nature of existence, which denote inescapable reason
"What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world." --Albert Einstein
lets back up a few lines to get the context of your quote
The use of fire the cultivation of edible plants,the steam engine - each discovered by one man"Only the individual can think, and thereby create new values for society, nay, even set up new moral standards to which the life of the community conforms.
He is talking about the contribution of individual thinkers in shaping society
How does this support your claim that eintstein did not think Of God as an individual.
He wasn't talking about steam engines in that quote. He was pointing out that the source of his ideals and standards in society come from individual thought, and not from some "moral god".
The last quote I posted is all you need. Here it is again...
"I cannot then believe in this concept of an anthropomorphic God who has the powers of interfering with these natural laws. ..." (Einstein)
The scientist's religious feeling takes the form of rapturous amazement at the HARMONY OF NATURAL LAW, which reveals an """INTELLIGENCE"""" of such superiority that,compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection. Albert Einstein
From your comment it would appear that you read the info box but didnt even watch the video as the context of the comments are clearly explained right back at the beginning of the video.
Great video, very inspiring. Many today misconstrue Einstein's religious beliefs, with candor I can say that Eisntein was not a theist, but he surely wasn't an Atheist. he can be considered more like a Pantheist, more likely a Deist with hiw mindset, he said he believed in sponiza's God, but Eisntein was more open minded to the idea of God and did not follow one specific belief in God, he made his own belief.
He's a religiosu non-believers, a new religion =p, he said it himself. =p
Physics in the very broadest sense (let's call it P1) includes everything, yes, but that is not the field physicists work in. They all specialize in a far more narrow field (P2), which is NOT physics in the broadest sense, and hence they do not and cannot know too much about fields that are distinctly different from P2, because it would divert their attention too much from this field.
Physics is the study of matter and motion. (Energy, too.) That's a broad statement, but physics is a broad area. And mathematics is used in most all corners of it.
The measurement of things in physics involves mathematics, and when we begin to make calculations regarding the interaction of things in nature, we grab our mathematics toolbox and go to town.WIKIANSWERS
Mathematics is the foundation of physics. Physicsphenomena DOTCOM
pest wrong - physics is a study of the laws of the universe and how they govern energy and matter (which are the same thing really). A physicist will not know anything about biology other then what they learned in HS or undergrad.
Eintien was a physicist and over qualified if anything
A physicist is a scientist who studies or practices physics. Physicists study a wide range of physical phenomena in many branches of physics spanning all length scales: from sub-atomic particles of which all ordinary matter is made (particle physics) to the behavior of the material Universe as a whole (cosmology).
Technically, chemistry and biology are just subcategories of Physics. It just takes longer to solve a chemistry problem using the Physics formulas than it does using the chemistry shortcuts. So there's no difference: physics includes chemistry and biology, plus more.
Physics is often said to be the "fundamental science" because each of the other disciplines (biology, chemistry, geology, material science,etc.) deals with particular types of material systems that obey the laws of physics.WIKAPE
Regardless of technicalities, although I would dispute what you've said, it is not relevant. Just because you've looked at the roots, doesn't mean you know what fruit the tree will produce. It is far too great a leap from particle physics and mathematics of same, to larger scale results for any human not immersed in the particular field to know much about it.
I'm not sure why we're even discussing this. Did Einstein even say anything about evolution, one way or the other?
physics and biology are completely different, think before you speak.
Chemistry in its purest form is a form of physics and when you apply chemistry to biology then you could consider biology physics but thats not correct. Biology mostly is to do with living systems and does not you math which is the language of physics.
Evolution could only be understood by applying the laws of physics.Math is often used in evolutionary theory.Ever here of haldanes dilema.Calculations for genetic mutations are essensial to analise the plausability of alleged evolutionary steps.
Evolution is a different field from biology, you are incorrect. They use mathmatics (not physics) to calculate population dynamics. Physics is directly associated with the laws of physics and not necesarily mathmatics. You are wrong by a long shot.
Einstein believing this, if he did, is fair enough. He's dead, so he won't be listening to my counter-arguments. Mind you, I'm alternating between figuring out what Einstein believed, and showing arguments to be invalid.
I do not believe in it, I consider it a possibility, one of several, with my limited understanding of physics, one that doesn't stem from age-old superstition and myth coupled with human vanity (ooh, we're a bit like the creator of the universe!! Please).
I'm mocking those who can't see past their own vanity and wishful thinking, and just say, hey, nobody knows what's going on. We are emotionally inclined to see familiar things in unfamiliar places. Anyone who is emotionally attached to a case has less credibility, therefore I also consider their proposal far less probable, because it comes from a wishful thinking rather than objective analysis.
if he was a deiast then he beleived in a designed universe.Thats the whole point of the video.
Its strange that when einstein and even hawking take the possability of God very very seriously,so many others just refuse to go there.Whats up there ?
But you must distinguise deism from religion and personal god. The "god" they are reffering to has nothing to do with a personal god. Many people say: "even Einstein was a bit religious, you know 'God doesn't play dice'". They are wrong, and I get angry at this BS.
Einstein was not a scientist, he was a Zionist creation.
SMILJANable 2 months ago
Argument from authority.
What Einstein believed is irrelevant. What he was able to prove is relevant.
If he did believe in a creator, he didn't prove the creator's existence.
sleazybtd 4 months ago
Einstein stated that "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment."
chalocorea999 1 year ago
Cool video!
Thanks ;)
DarwinResearcher 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@scarwarsnow You're an idiot who can't even write a complete sentence. (i.e. "He was fuckin' moron.."). I'm not sure what crack-pipe website or source you got your information on, but you are the epitome of how true knowledge is being convoluted and distorted on the internet.
athltspirit 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@athltspirit As you have intercepted me and its you who replied to my comment. You must not care if you feel you are right, as i do not care about your views on this motherfucker called einstein. Shove your thoughts and ur grammar in ur ass. Einstein was an asshole, just like you are.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
Comment removed
athltspirit 1 year ago
Comment removed
athltspirit 1 year ago
Comment removed
athltspirit 1 year ago
Comment removed
athltspirit 1 year ago
I like how you say reply to all evolutionists as if it were a minority or something. Or your trying to prove creationism with this video? Hello.... Evolution is fact.
imakegirlsperculate 1 year ago
@imakegirlsperculate @imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
@scarwarsnow communism isn't exactly evil. What it started out to be, socialism was indeed the best ideology ever but like many things. It turned sour.
imakegirlsperculate 1 year ago
@imakegirlsperculate Communism is an impractical and non sense thought where everybody is treated equally. Given the inherent human tendencies and characteristics of life where no 2 men are equal under any circumstances. Communism is an aberration and this aberration was actually implemented by the Soviet Union, where millions died for resisting this evil ideology. Idealistic definitions of democracy sounds too good but again the implementation has rendered the mankind into utter darkness.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
@scarwarsnow its better than fascism. And socialism, not communism is perfect. Of course at out point in evolution impossible, but you have to keep doing something to get to that perfection, even if you never reach it. Marks idea was that perfect utopia, distorted by the likes of stalin and such. Communism isn't evil, it's only as evil as it's leader. If Ghandi was a communist leader you wouldn't call it bad. I'm not pro communist, i'm just not american.
imakegirlsperculate 1 year ago
@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
@imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
@imakegirlsperculate @imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@imakegirlsperculate @imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
@imakegirlsperculate @imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine. And you sound like a communist casualty
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@imakegirlsperculate @imakegirlsperculate If gandhi was communist he would not have been what he is today, and moreover i would have hated him as well.If u dont know, my country has witnessed marxism in one of the most brutal forms when we sided with USSR in the cold war. i dont know even after consuming hundreds of millions you can still defend it and its still legalized in many countries including mine.
scarwarsnow 1 year ago
"in view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, whit my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God.
But what makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views"
ALBERT EINSTEIN
speedy9229 1 year ago
In a 1954 letter to Eric Gutkind, a year before Einstein's death, he wrote: "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."
In another letter he wrote: "If something is in me that can be called religious, then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as science can reveal it."
So much for Einstein's belief in God.
TheQRabbit 1 year ago 3
Einstein believed in Spinoza's God... Look it up... Just Google Spinoza's God and educate yourself.
On the video itself, thumbs down...
LordBLB 1 year ago
@LordBLB you didnt watch the video did you
pestmanpat 1 year ago
@pestmanpat "didnt watch the video"
Stopped it about 1 minute in after you said something about him finding "intelligence in the universe". This is FALSE. Again. Look up Spinoza's God. It's not a personal God, nor an intelligent being in outer space. It's an observation that Nature and the universe itself, and the laws therein, are what he would call God. In essence, Einstein was a Agnostic Pantheist, which still falls firmly within the realm of 'Atheist', by definition. Again, educate yourself.
LordBLB 1 year ago
@LordBLB Spinoza is mentioned in this video.Dont you think you should actually watch it before you critique it ?
pestmanpat 1 year ago
@pestmanpat Sorry if I misunderstood the meaning of this video. But your 'underbar' message could have been a bit clearer, as well as many of those quotes from Einstein that could have been taken for ANY context. Einstein even said himself that he hated giving his opinions on 'God' and 'Religion' for this exact reason... That people would quote mine the hell out of it, and use it to their benefit.
LordBLB 1 year ago
@LordBLB No problem.Context is very important i agree.And yes Einstein didnt like being quoted but Not just by theists.
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. Einstein.
He didnt want to be put in anyones box.Thats why his opinions are so important.
pestmanpat 1 year ago
@pestmanpat
"yet people who say there is no God"
There's certainly no evidence of such a thing. The default position is Atheist in reality. A 'non-belief' in any Gods or anything supernatural. The clear way to approach someone who is talking about a God(s), is to ask them to define said God(s) first. Then, a critical analysis, and the evidence for God(s) is usually, if not always found wanting. I'm honestly surprised there's still Theists today's world with all that we know now, and will know.
LordBLB 1 year ago
@LordBLB Yet a brilliant mind such as Einstein did see evidence of some kind of intelligence in the workings of the cosmos.The default position should be agnostic not atheist.There is real evidence that could be interpreted as intelligent design.
The notion that the universe sprang from nothing is in my mind much harder to account for than ID
Define god ? Good question.For the purpose of this discussion i define God as
an intelligent entity.
pestmanpat 1 year ago
@pestmanpat "some kind of intelligence"
Yet, to put something that "looks" like intelligence (I don't think it does) at the feet of something that cannot be proven. To assume a "creator" is to assume something so complex that IT, in itself, MUST have been created. You're placing yourself firmly in an unending loop of Cause and Effect. And to simply state that this "God" is eternal, and does not need a creator, is ignoring the fact that the same can be said about the Universe itself.
LordBLB 1 year ago
@pestmanpat "the notion that the universe sprang from nothing"
Science does not state that the universe "sprang from nothing". That was Creationists claim...
LordBLB 1 year ago
@pestmanpat "Einstein did see some kind of intelligence"
He did not attribute that observation to some "Invisible Sky Daddy". Which is why I said he was an Agnostic Pantheist. A Pantheist believes the Universe itself, is God. Yet we do not claim it is intelligent nor sentient. It operates within the laws that exist, and they are never broken. Like Carl Sagan said: "We are made of star-stuff".
LordBLB 1 year ago
@LordBLB He did not believe in any of mans interpretations of who or what God is.
Again watch my video.In it Einstein claims that he does not think he is a pantheist.
He then give an example of a little boy in a library who does not understand the origin or the language in those books but he does understand they were the result of an intelligent mind.I believe Einstein was agnostic as to the nature of that intelligence but as far as the existence of a creator he was a theist or deist.
pestmanpat 1 year ago
@pestmanpat By Einstein's own explanation of his beliefs, he was a Pantheist (whether admitted or not). You can extract his words to match this very definition from your own video of his quotes. Perhaps Einstein did not understand what it means to be a Pantheist? After all, he wasn't a genius at everything. Only physics/math.
Here's the definition:
pan·the·ism (n) 1 : a doctrine or idea that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe.
Sounds like Einstein to me...
LordBLB 1 year ago
@LordBLB i disagree if you think patheism is a belief in an unconscious force.
He repeatedly refers to this force as intelligent he wants to know the mind of God,he sees reason in the universe.
pestmanpat 1 year ago
@pestmanpat "if you think pantheism is a belief in an unconscious force"
I just gave you the verbatim definition from Meriam-Webster Dictionary Online for Pantheist. The definition I gave you, is what Einstein was, and matches what he said he thought 'God' was. Whether you think he was or not is irrelevant.
"He repeatedly refers to this force as intelligent"
Again I say "Context".
LordBLB 1 year ago
@pestmanpat Your mistake is assuming the context of his words, when in reality Einstein constantly chose his words carefully. If you really READ what he says, you'll see the context, and also see they he intentionally left things broad. He did not have a working definition of what he thought 'God' was. Only that he saw 'something' in the universe as a whole. He never once defined that 'God'. So that's where we'll have to agree to disagree. I think he was at least a Pantheist, not just.
Peace
LordBLB 1 year ago
Amazing video! Great music! Thank you for this :-)
Ptitefee59 1 year ago
@Ptitefee59 thanks please subscribe i got a lot more stuff like that
pestmanpat 1 year ago
Can someone explain to me why Einstein didnt like the Quantum theory?
x3Mysteriiousx3 1 year ago
Amazing how evos can take what is so obvious, and if it doesn't fit their agenda, scold you for it's use. I have a page on my blog with Einstein's thoughts. Which are so similar to mine.
Thanks for the great vid. This is so much better than so many evo-vids, which automatically get *****. This is a *****. Good music too. And thanks for the look at mine.
stevebee92653 1 year ago
@stevebee92653 ill check out that page thanks
pestmanpat 1 year ago
Why in the info do you refer them to Evolutionist? Seems like you are referring to Atheist. The world and life on it did evolve, not just atheist know this, religious followers do as well. Why do people argue over his quotes? He died 55 years ago; none of us knew him personally. Study his work, not his quotes. Oh, and people need to stop using "the child in the library" example. To atheist, that just leaves the question, Where did "god" come from, then? Study his work, not his quotes
phatcartoon 2 years ago
@phatcartoon
Most if not all atheists are evolutionists.Rejecting a supernatural being they look to cosmic chemical and biological evolution as a way to account for origin.
re: Where did "god" come from, then?
God is by definition without a beginning.
If you believe that time began with the big bang as most atheists do then you as an atheist also need to explain an action before time.A change in states where some cause acted to create time.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Most scientist are then what you call "evolutionists". A person can believe in a god and accept evolution. This goes for most of the people I know, and many of which are church goers. I'm an atheist and I don't except the Big Bang. Much of Einstein's and others' work suggest the Big Bang, though I feel like there are many more secrets to be unlocked. Arguing quotes is bad. Einstein once thought the universe was static until Edwin Hubble changed his views. Views change, quotes don't.
phatcartoon 2 years ago
@phatcartoon
Arguing quotes "out of context " is bad.
if there are many more secrets to be unlocked then perhaps its to early to be throwing out God.
Why should a no God universe be the default position ?
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Arguing quotes that are not yours is bad. Sharing quotes is ok, but you never knew the man. You can only assume. Like I said before, a man's views over years can change. Making their quotes no longer reflecting their current view.
Default position? Maybe were you live, not so much here; other way around.
Does it really matter if he believed in a god or not? He gave us a new understanding of, energy, light, gravity, and gave birth to quantum mechanics. His work is what is important.
phatcartoon 2 years ago
@pestmanpat Life evolved. Fact. You can't appeal to Hawking's authority in another video and then dismiss this part of his understanding. The theory of evolution explains the origin of species. The idea that life followed non-biological chemical reactions is too a theory, subscribed to by Hawkings, and, if erroneuos, does not then become proof of God. cont...
EdwardLittleWilly 1 year ago
@pestmanpat Doesn't your Hawkings video advocate the idea that time began with the big bang?
"God is by definition without a beginning" - Elsewhere, Einstein makes clear that we cannot conceive of what we call God. We cannot, therefore, define him/her/it. Einstein embraced the unknown.
EdwardLittleWilly 1 year ago
These are Einstein's views, and he is certainly welcome to them, as is anyone. But this does not constitute evidence as the only thing demonstrated is a conclusion supported by Einstein's quotes, not physical evidence.
And I notice you included Einstein's views on Quantum Mechanics, which I also mentioned. Quantum Theory was the bane to Einstein's universal idea of God, which is why he struggled against it so hard. In the end Einstein didn't show it to be wrong, and it remains to this day.
chaossource 2 years ago
"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,"
mrrealtime 2 years ago
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.EINSTEIN
pestmanpat 2 years ago
There is a difference between believing in a personal God such as Yahweh or Allah and believing in an unknown intelligence as EINSTEIN did.
On the identity of God Einstein was an agnostic.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
way to cherry pick and quote mine!! if you actually check all those quotes and read them in their context you will see that your interpretation is way off the mark. Go check Wikiquote and see the full breadth of his statements...
This video is about the same as saying Darwin thought the eye was designed then listing that one quote mine that is commonly misused by creationists.
1n354a 2 years ago 2
You should have given that comment more thought.Go ahead choose a quote and show me how it is out of context,I would be happy to correct you.
You could also explain what Einstein meant with the little boy in the library
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Perhaps interference in the order of things comes from the singularity? I don't see the contradiction.
klindred 2 years ago
Bs?
Where did that come from ?
its not my interpretation in in the next line of your quote.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Apparently it is your interpretation. What Einstein said in the rest of the quote is a dig at world religions. It in no way negates his statement about not believing in a God who "interferes in the course of events". This is very clearly and plainly about cause and effect EVENTS, and the concept of determinism in the natural world.
Here's a second, even clearer iteration of the same idea: "The idea of a Being who interferes with the sequence of events in the world is absolutely impossible."
EvoBiologist 2 years ago 8
Again i ask you to look at the following line of your new quote
Neither the religion of fear nor the social-moral religion can have any hold on him.
The sequence of events in the world refers to the moral decisions man makes the actions we take and the outcome of our actions.Einstein could not conceive of a creator who intervenes in our lives weather we do good or bad.
Nothing whatsoever to do with evolution cosmic chemical or biological
pestmanpat 2 years ago
That line is not part of my newest quote, only the older one.
Einstein, a physicist is clearly referring to the problem of a deterministic universe if God interferes. He's talking about the ability for science to follow events back in time and figure out how they unfolded by understanding events in the present. This is impossible with a God who fiddles with His creation after He has initially made it. Einstein is making a sort of deistic claim about the nature of the universe.
EvoBiologist 2 years ago 2
For any one who is pervaded with the sense of causal law in all that happens, who accepts in real earnest the assumption of causality, the idea of a Being who interferes with the sequence of events in the world is absolutely impossible. Neither the religion of fear nor the social-moral religion can have any hold on him. As quoted in Has Science Discovered God
pestmanpat 2 years ago
"causal law in ALL that happens" - get that? God doesn't interfere with ANYTHING, not just human moral decisions.
This isn't that hard to grasp. If you were familiar with Einstein's history of scientific battles and discoveries, you'd see that Einstein battled with the quantum physicists because he believed EVERYTHING is causal, and nothing left to chance. God doesn't play dice because EVERYTHING is predetermined and the causal chain can be studied back to the beginning without interference.
EvoBiologist 2 years ago 2
What are you saying
1.God built this planet and all life on it but does not interfere in our lives
2.God built the universe and its laws to allow for evolution but does not interfere in evolutionary process once he set them up
3 God built the singularity and the known laws but does not interfere is cosmic evolution and the known laws once he set them up
4 God only created the singularity then sat back and waited for laws to evolve somehow
At what point did God stop interfering
pestmanpat 2 years ago
At what point did God stop interfering according to your understanding of Einsteins view ?
pestmanpat 2 years ago
According to my understanding of Einstein's views from what he has said about God and the universe, God created a singularity knowing full well the sorts of laws and complexity that would result. Additionally, Einstein felt that God was in a sense represented by these natural laws - that studying science was a way to know God.
To Einstein, the brilliance of the Creation (and thus, the Creator) was that it never required interference to build complexity and beauty.
EvoBiologist 2 years ago 3
interference ?
if you mean interference in tinkering with design then no.Einstein did not believe in an experimental designer God.But if you mean interference in the consequences of our decisions then your right.Einstein did not belive in such a God.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
No, I meant interference in His original design. I'm saying Einstein thought an intelligent being Created the Universe, and then left it alone - no interference of any kind after the initial start.
EvoBiologist 2 years ago
That would be a deist... so instead of trying to be all flashy and smart looking... why dont you just say Einstein was a deist... simplicity is key to guarantee that everyone understands your point.
Briena1982 2 years ago
"why dont you just say Einstein was a deist"
Because the second part of my comment goes way beyond simple deism. I think Einstein would not have considered himself simply a deist.
Simplicity is great - we should make things as simple as possible, but no simpler. I'm not trying to "be all flashy and smart", just very clear (especially after several rounds of back and forth with pestmanpat on Einstein's beliefs).
EvoBiologist 2 years ago
I do not make the claim you are attacking.
You are wrong to conflate science with Einsteins beliefs in a non-interfering god. Scientists are free to believe all sorts of things that they have not used science to test. His comments about religiosity and science are about scientists having a different perspective, not about using the scientific method to test that.
Einstein's God never "interferes in the course of events" (in his words), so he couldn't have agreed with your creation ideas,
EvoBiologist 2 years ago 5
As i pointed out on my other video Einstein is there referring to moral interference.Nothing to do with evolution.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
So if a guy thats smart in some areas but socially handicapped in others, like einstein believes one thing it must be true? Stop hyping the guy, he made some good discoverys but if he didnt someone else would later, if that guy believed santa...SANTA MUST BE REAL RIGHT???
trakkedintub 2 years ago
There has been much debate as to Einsteins views on God. hence the video.
your logic is pretty silly his belief in god is based on facts and observations that we all can look at for ourselves.I dont follow einstein as a guru but i do find his views interesting. is that OK !
pestmanpat 2 years ago
he didn't believe in santa, learn how to argue before you try. if you think you know better then Einstein on issues like creation, then by all means, believe what you want. but i have to correct you on one point:
"So if a guy thats smart in some areas..."
please understand, that he was much much more then "smart"
Tartersauce101 2 years ago
When Einstein spoke of the child in the library, he was clearly expressing his having witnessed "intelligent design" within the universe.
Sorry monkey boys, that's simply the way it went down!
Chuichupachichi 2 years ago
The reason why there are contradicting quotes from Einstein regarding God. Is because his views didn't remain the same from his youth to his old age. Prior to Einstein's discoveries the prevailing view amongst most scientists was that time & space were eternally existent. Thus, there had never been a point of creation. But Einstein's work revealed the finite nature of time & space. Most of the scientific community, including Einstein didn't like the implications of a creation point causing the
Chuichupachichi 2 years ago
beginning of the universe's existence. So dismayed was Einstein that he labored in the effort to disprove his own discoveries, but to no avail. Then, when Einstein was invited by Hubble to the California observatory to witness his "red shift" discovery is when Einstein finally conceded and said - "I am no longer interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I simply want to know how he created the universe. I want to know his thoughts"
Chuichupachichi 2 years ago
I must have missed this earlier .Good comments
pestmanpat 2 years ago
A will is one of many necessary 'ingredients' (obviously there are other requirements... memory, self reflection, etc.) for intelligence. Without it you do not have this. For instance, computers are not intelligent. Yet.
moekelok 2 years ago
Another couple of things... you say; 'Its very clear he did beleive in an unknown intelligence'.
I do not see that it is clear he 'believed' any of this.
He also says; "I am a deeply religious NONBELIEVER, this is a somewhat new kind of religion."
Also; a few comments down, you issue a challenge regarding Einstein's views on both biological and cosmic evolution.
May I ask whether or not you are a young-earth creationist?
moekelok 2 years ago
Again... ""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.""
Do you know the difference between a supernatural definition of god and a natural definition of god? If you define all the collective energy (i.e. everything that exists) in the the cosmos as 'god' but do not assign a 'consciousness' or 'will' (my 2nd quote) to it, why bother calling it god?
moekelok 2 years ago 2
Do you know the definition of intelligence?
pestmanpat 2 years ago
""It was of course a lie, what you read about my religious beliefs, 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."" - ALBERT EINSTEIN
moekelok 2 years ago 2
Do you know the difference between a personal god and an unidentified deity ?
Einstein didnt beleive in any of mans interperetations or personal Gods.Its very clear he did beleive in an unknown intelligence .
pestmanpat 2 years ago
""It seems to me that the idea of a personal god is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere."" - ALBERT EINSTEIN
moekelok 2 years ago
Those atheist who made a video that God does not exist using science specially Einstein's Theories are fooling them selves.
Poor atheist I hope God will show them the right path.
"Be careful Atheism is like Cancer."
Maverick S.
makubx 2 years ago
Well just wanted to say I made a post of course but you deleted it -author of this video is not only very wrong einstein would be rolling in his grave. Einstein believed in spinozas god - a methaphore for the universe, and the spirit of exploration and amazement - not abrahamic god.
CCPnoob 2 years ago 2
I only deleted the one where you use the f word.
you can say whatever you like provided you are civil.
Einstein "is" the author of the quotes in this video.
he speaks of intellence.
not abrahamic god. That is true
pestmanpat 2 years ago
You claim Einstein believed in a God who designed nature, yet I already gave you a quote from Einstein, which I post here for the third and final time
"I cannot then believe in this concept of an anthropomorphic God who has the powers of interfering with these natural laws." (Einstein)
This is only compatible with pantheism or panentheism.
Him saying that he doesn't know if he can call himself a pantheist is neither affirming nor denying. He may have called himself a panentheist if he knew.
gtg309v 2 years ago
Heres the next paragraph you didnt quote If there is any such concept as a God, it is a subtle spirit, not an image of a man that so many have fixed in their minds. In essence, my religion consists of a humble admiration for this illimitable superior spirit that reveals itself in the slight details that we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds .
CONT---
pestmanpat 2 years ago
In the following quote he actually attributes the creation of natural law to an intelligent agent
rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law which reveals an "INTELLIGENCE" of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
After his analogy about the child in the library, he goes on to explain "We see a universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws... I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not two separate things."
I don't see any debate as to whether Spinoza's god is the most accurate depiction of Einstein's belief in god.
gtg309v 2 years ago
1. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism
2.I don't think I can call myself a pantheist
EINSTEIN
As for his view on separation of the soul and the body again this has nothing whatsoever to do with his belief in an intelligent designer.
By the way i personally do not believe in the soul and the body as separate.
The living are conscious that they will die but the dead are conscious of nothing at all
ECC 9:5
pestmanpat 2 years ago
"I can understand your aversion to the use of the term 'religion' to describe an emotional and psychological attitude which shows itself most clearly in Spinoza... I have not found a better expression than 'religious' for the trust in the rational nature of reality that is, at least to a certain extent, accessible ot human reason." (Einstein)
gtg309v 2 years ago
Einstein did not believe in biological,chemical or cosmic evolution.He believed in a designed universe.This is the point of the video.
Yes he liked a lot of spinozas views but he was not a spinoza follower and he was not spinoza.He had his own ideas
trust in the rational nature of reality that is, at least to a certain extent, accessible of human reason "Einstein"
This is a beautiful insight into Einsteins thinking. cont----
pestmanpat 2 years ago
He found evidence of God not in ancient scripture but in the laws of physics and his limited observations of the universe.This is why Einstein has been called the father of intelligent design.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Well I can't argue with someone who injects their beliefs. It's quite clear to me that Einstein felt a kinship with the Spinoza depiction of god more than any other. But if you want to think that you and Einstein believe in the same type of god, then that's your business... whatever.
gtg309v 2 years ago
No i dont think Einstein believed in the same God i do, not at all. My point has always been that
he rejects cosmic evolution in favor of intelligent design.nothing more. So let me ask you where you stand on this question.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
My stance on intelligent design? I can't take a stand on that, since I don't know. It's an interesting question though. The only sense in which I would think intelligent design were possible is if it was ultimately necessary in fulfillment of some requirement of something. It gets pretty philosophical at that point. But I don't have any definitive belief with regards to that. However I am no creationist.
gtg309v 2 years ago
If we work on the premise that there is no intelligence involved then our research reflects this.We seek to explain origin without direction or purpose.If we could consider that this universe is the result of a designer then our research would reflect that premise and we may find good supporting evidence.Main stream science is completely bias on this and as a a result there is zero research done in the field of intelligent design.
ill send you a video for you to consider.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
He sure was'nt a PanTHEIST , as he was not theist, NOR Atheist. He said he believed in Spinozas impersonal god, "a supreme reasoning power". So, if he believed this, and believed the Universe was infinite, he was definately a PanDeist or PanenDeist.
Those terms were'nt really in use yet, but his views are consistent with them.
"That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."-Einstein.
Iconoclastithon 2 years ago
What do you thin k he means by a "reasoning" power.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
I think that when you take all the things he said about his beliefs, about not beliving in a personal god and finding such belief childish; and using the word God to refer to this superior reasoning power that's revealed in the incomprehensible universe, etc. And that he never said and to my knowledge denied beeing both atheist and pantheist, that he was a Deist, more specifically a PanenDeist or PanDeist. Reasoning power= an intelligent organizing force of some myterious kind.
Iconoclastithon 2 years ago
RE:And that he never said and to my knowledge denied beeing both atheist and pantheist,
Did you not watch the video ?
"I am not an atheist" and i dont think i can call myself a pantheist "EINSTEIN"
RE: Reasoning power= an intelligent organizing force of some myterious kind.
Yes thats what he believed as oposed to an undirected unplanned universe without the presence and guiding of an intelligent agent.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He sure was'nt a PanTHEIST , as he was not theist, NOR Atheist. He said he believed in Spinozas impersonal god, "a supreme reasoning power". So, if he believed this, and believed the Universe was infinite, he was definately a PanDeist or PanenDeist.
Those terms were'nt really in use yet, but his views are consistent with them.
"That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."-Einstein
Iconoclastithon 2 years ago
Oh he believed in cosmic and biological evolution indeed. Einsteins god was a PanenDeistic or PanDeistic{not theist/pantheist/panentheist} one, he excepted all the findings of science. And though he may have waxed philosophical about an intelligent designer of sorts, he rejected and would today reject intelligent design science{pseudo-science}.
Iconoclastithon 2 years ago
I would be very interested indeed to read any quotes from Einstein supporting cosmic and particularly biological evolution.
Please direct me to any such quotes.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
I've not read any Einstein aside fom the quotes of his beliefs. So I cou;d'nt provide those. I'm sure there's probably something somewhere. And even if there isn't I think it's probbaly safe to assume that because Einstein was a legit scientists and evolution was established scientific fact that he most likely accepted it.
Iconoclastithon 2 years ago
So when you stated "Oh he believed in cosmic and biological evolution indeed.
you actually have not a shred of supporting evidence by way of anything coming from Einstein himself.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Einstein Albert the little patent clerk in Switzerland,the fulfilment of Isaac Newton"s gravity,which took Einstein over 200 years to explain --and the E=mc2
the theory that space and time are relative concepts rather than absolute concepts
He was a scientist but had no more of a clue, was there or wasn't there a higher power
His brother Frank had as much knowledge of this perplexity ?
pdmac46 2 years ago
wait so idiot is considerd profanity? Thats idiotic?
CCPnoob 2 years ago
Thats not the word i had a problem with.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
"I cannot then believe in this concept of an anthropomorphic God who has the powers of interfering with these natural laws. ..." (Einstein)
In essence, Einstein is not referring to a god which is above or superior to nature. It is the Spinoza God...
gtg309v 2 years ago
None of this has any relevance to the point of this video. That is that Einstein concluded that the design of the universe is the result of intelligence.
He makes no reference as to the identity of this intelligence.
Your point that Einstein is not referring to a god which is above or superior to nature is interesting.You see i believe that the first
cause was an intelligent form of dynamic energy who gave of itself to create everything.
Therefore everything is made of the stuff of God.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
CCPnoob I removed your comment due to profanity.you are free to re post your point if you clean it up.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
"When modern scientists such as Einstein and Stephen Hawking mention 'God' in their writings, this is what they seem to mean: that God is Nature."
-- Victor J Stenger, Has Science Found God? (2001), chapter 3
gtg309v 2 years ago
It is difficult to discuss the beginning of the universe without mentioning the concept of God. My work on the origin of the universe is on the borderline between science and religion, but I try to stay on the scientific side of the border. It is quite possible that God acts in ways that cannot be described by scientific laws. [Stephen Hawking]
watch my video "the truth about stephen Hawking
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Einstein said you could call him an agnostic. He said this essentially because when he refers to god, it is really an unnecessary label that is only being used for convenience, since we already have a label for what he is talking about: nature.
Einstein has said that Buddhism is one religion that could fit the bill for a cosmic religion for the future. Buddhism also has no need for the god label.
gtg309v 2 years ago
It's a shame that feeble minded people try to equate their beliefs with Einstein's words.
gtg309v 2 years ago
I took a look at your profile and i see your only 22.
That explains why you would announce yourself with such a foolish comment. If there is any substance to your claim i would be happy to discuss it with you.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
And pointing out my age does absolutely nothing to counter what I said. However it does seem to cooborate my claim that you're feeble minded.
I'll continue with the expectation that your next comment won't be so disappointing. It is well established in Einstein's own words that he did not believe in a personal god at all, so if you are trying to argue that he did in this video, then you are certainly wrong.
gtg309v 2 years ago
True. Had you been 50 years old and made that comment it would be just as immature.
You see if you had done any research into this video and actually watched it you would know the fundamental difference between belief in a "personal God" that is one described by man and belief in an unknown creator.
The context of Einsteins thoughts can be seen in his illustration of the child in the library.
watch it again and if you
want to dispute the authenticity or context of his quotes go ahead.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Actually I already knew the difference between belief in a personal god and that of an unknown creator. Maybe you shouldn't write in the comment section for this video that this is a reply to "YOUTUBERS WHO HAVE MADE A GREAT DEAL OF EINSTEIN QUOTES DENOUNCING RELIGION AND A PERSONAL GOD" if you aren't trying to argue for his belief in a personal god.
Einstein said he believes in a Spinoza's God, which is saying that god is all of nature, not above or superior to it.
gtg309v 2 years ago
Einstein uses the word god since it is the best word to use when he is describing his personal feelings of admiration and wonder at the harmony in nature.
Just like the way he would say "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", where he calls himself religious even though he is of no religion, simply because it is the most appropriate word to describe his feelings.
gtg309v 2 years ago
This video was created to address all of your points here.And to show the context of what he believes. HENCE THE TITLE.Most people equate his rejection of a personal god with rejection of an intelligent designer and then jump a step further to claim he did not believe in a god at all and that he only spoke of God in metaphor.This is clearly mistaken.
The little boy in the library proves his belief in an intelligent thinking being "someone must have written the books"
pestmanpat 2 years ago
A thinking god IS a personal god. A personal god is a deity that can be related to as a person. Thinking is related to that of a person or self conscious being.
"I think, therefore I am." - Descartes
Einstein DID NOT advocate a personal god (no thinking, self conscious being!) It is clear from his own words that he was fascinated with a Spinoza's God, which IS NATURE.
gtg309v 2 years ago
Einstein believed the mind and body were inseparable, and yet you try to say that Einstein believed in a non-physical, thinking god?... You call yourself a theist, and you try to inject your beliefs into the words of someone who never called himself a theist? You are the only one taking things out of context.
gtg309v 2 years ago
I think it is you injecting your beliefs.
Lets look at the source of your claims here .Post up the supporting quotes so that we can Analise there context.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
"Only the individual can think, and thereby create new values for society, nay, even set up new moral standards to which the life of the community conforms..." (A. Einstein)
"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." (Albert Einstein)
"I cannot conceive of a God who ... has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves." (A. Einstein)
gtg309v 2 years ago
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists..." (Einstein)
gtg309v 2 years ago
"An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension, nor do I wish it otherwise; such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls." (Einstein)
How immature of Einstein...
gtg309v 2 years ago
"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."
Albert Einstein
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Its debatable if spinoza was an atheist or a pantheist.
when asked if he believed in spinozas God Einstein said this
"I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist ".
We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books.
He liked Spinozas view that God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists.
He did not like to be labeled as anything
pestmanpat 2 years ago
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists..." (Einstein)
You take his use of the word intelligence out of context. It is the best word to use to describe the harmony and structure he saw in the universe. He is not referring to an intelligence like that which humans possess...
And I don't see why you cited the Einstein quote where he says it makes him angry when people claim he didn't believe in god. I've said he believes in Spinoza's god.
gtg309v 2 years ago
INTELLIGENCE
1.capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity.
2. manifestation of a high mental capacity
Intelligence is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly
EINSTEIN CHOOSE HIS WORDS CAREFULLY
pestmanpat 2 years ago
I don't think an illimitable spirit and/or intelligence means that Einstein was not a pantheist or panentheist. This illimitable spirit and intelligence of Einstein's god are nature. The reasoning, or intelligence, come into play in the question of whether there are fundamental, indestrubtible truths which must be obeyed concerning the nature of existence, which denote inescapable reason
"What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world." --Albert Einstein
gtg309v 2 years ago
lets back up a few lines to get the context of your quote
The use of fire the cultivation of edible plants,the steam engine - each discovered by one man"Only the individual can think, and thereby create new values for society, nay, even set up new moral standards to which the life of the community conforms.
He is talking about the contribution of individual thinkers in shaping society
How does this support your claim that eintstein did not think Of God as an individual.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
He wasn't talking about steam engines in that quote. He was pointing out that the source of his ideals and standards in society come from individual thought, and not from some "moral god".
The last quote I posted is all you need. Here it is again...
"I cannot then believe in this concept of an anthropomorphic God who has the powers of interfering with these natural laws. ..." (Einstein)
gtg309v 2 years ago
RE; EINSTEINS HARMONY IN NATURE
The scientist's religious feeling takes the form of rapturous amazement at the HARMONY OF NATURAL LAW, which reveals an """INTELLIGENCE"""" of such superiority that,compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection. Albert Einstein
pestmanpat 2 years ago
From your comment it would appear that you read the info box but didnt even watch the video as the context of the comments are clearly explained right back at the beginning of the video.
pestmanpat 2 years ago
Great video, very inspiring. Many today misconstrue Einstein's religious beliefs, with candor I can say that Eisntein was not a theist, but he surely wasn't an Atheist. he can be considered more like a Pantheist, more likely a Deist with hiw mindset, he said he believed in sponiza's God, but Eisntein was more open minded to the idea of God and did not follow one specific belief in God, he made his own belief.
He's a religiosu non-believers, a new religion =p, he said it himself. =p
ogirv101 3 years ago
I think i agree with most of your comment.
he does state in the video that he does not think he can be called a pantheist.
The last part of your comment is spot on.
pestmanpat 3 years ago
Physics in the very broadest sense (let's call it P1) includes everything, yes, but that is not the field physicists work in. They all specialize in a far more narrow field (P2), which is NOT physics in the broadest sense, and hence they do not and cannot know too much about fields that are distinctly different from P2, because it would divert their attention too much from this field.
SZSt 3 years ago
What you're saying is essentially this: "Einstein was a physicist (P2), hence he knows much about everything that physics (P1) is about."
That's completely and utterly misleading and dishonest.
SZSt 3 years ago
Mathematics is the backbone of physics
Physics is the study of matter and motion. (Energy, too.) That's a broad statement, but physics is a broad area. And mathematics is used in most all corners of it.
The measurement of things in physics involves mathematics, and when we begin to make calculations regarding the interaction of things in nature, we grab our mathematics toolbox and go to town.WIKIANSWERS
Mathematics is the foundation of physics. Physicsphenomena DOTCOM
pestmanpat 3 years ago
pest wrong - physics is a study of the laws of the universe and how they govern energy and matter (which are the same thing really). A physicist will not know anything about biology other then what they learned in HS or undergrad.
CCPnoob 3 years ago
Einstein was not a biologist, so his views on evolution aren't very interesting.
SZSt 3 years ago
Eintien was a physicist and over qualified if anything
A physicist is a scientist who studies or practices physics. Physicists study a wide range of physical phenomena in many branches of physics spanning all length scales: from sub-atomic particles of which all ordinary matter is made (particle physics) to the behavior of the material Universe as a whole (cosmology).
pestmanpat 3 years ago
Well, biology isn't part of it.
SZSt 3 years ago
Technically, chemistry and biology are just subcategories of Physics. It just takes longer to solve a chemistry problem using the Physics formulas than it does using the chemistry shortcuts. So there's no difference: physics includes chemistry and biology, plus more.
Physics is often said to be the "fundamental science" because each of the other disciplines (biology, chemistry, geology, material science,etc.) deals with particular types of material systems that obey the laws of physics.WIKAPE
pestmanpat 3 years ago
Regardless of technicalities, although I would dispute what you've said, it is not relevant. Just because you've looked at the roots, doesn't mean you know what fruit the tree will produce. It is far too great a leap from particle physics and mathematics of same, to larger scale results for any human not immersed in the particular field to know much about it.
I'm not sure why we're even discussing this. Did Einstein even say anything about evolution, one way or the other?
SZSt 3 years ago
physics and biology are completely different, think before you speak.
Chemistry in its purest form is a form of physics and when you apply chemistry to biology then you could consider biology physics but thats not correct. Biology mostly is to do with living systems and does not you math which is the language of physics.
Einstein had no expertese in biology.
CCPnoob 3 years ago
Evolution could only be understood by applying the laws of physics.Math is often used in evolutionary theory.Ever here of haldanes dilema.Calculations for genetic mutations are essensial to analise the plausability of alleged evolutionary steps.
it is you who should think before you speak.
pestmanpat 3 years ago
Evolution is a different field from biology, you are incorrect. They use mathmatics (not physics) to calculate population dynamics. Physics is directly associated with the laws of physics and not necesarily mathmatics. You are wrong by a long shot.
CCPnoob 3 years ago
mathematic is physic dude
you trying to act smart but you...
Th0usandMaster 2 years ago
Einstein believing this, if he did, is fair enough. He's dead, so he won't be listening to my counter-arguments. Mind you, I'm alternating between figuring out what Einstein believed, and showing arguments to be invalid.
I do not believe in it, I consider it a possibility, one of several, with my limited understanding of physics, one that doesn't stem from age-old superstition and myth coupled with human vanity (ooh, we're a bit like the creator of the universe!! Please).
SZSt 3 years ago
I'm mocking those who can't see past their own vanity and wishful thinking, and just say, hey, nobody knows what's going on. We are emotionally inclined to see familiar things in unfamiliar places. Anyone who is emotionally attached to a case has less credibility, therefore I also consider their proposal far less probable, because it comes from a wishful thinking rather than objective analysis.
SZSt 3 years ago
Einstein was a deist, and THAT'S IT. End of discussion. And you can't connect that with religion, Einstein contradicts religion.
raoskaos 3 years ago
if he was a deiast then he beleived in a designed universe.Thats the whole point of the video.
Its strange that when einstein and even hawking take the possability of God very very seriously,so many others just refuse to go there.Whats up there ?
pestmanpat 3 years ago
But you must distinguise deism from religion and personal god. The "god" they are reffering to has nothing to do with a personal god. Many people say: "even Einstein was a bit religious, you know 'God doesn't play dice'". They are wrong, and I get angry at this BS.
raoskaos 3 years ago