Einstein:
Science and Religion
HOME
Childhood
Becoming a Freethinker and a Scientist
Religious Concepts
Prayer
The Meaning of Life
Purpose in Nature
The Soul
On Ego, Consciousness, and “Eternal Life”
Jesus
No Personal God
Short Comments on God
Atheism
Science and Religion
The Mysterious
The Religiousness of Science
The Development of Religion
Science and Religion
Religion and Science: Irreconcilable?
A Conversation with Gustav Bucky
Short Comments on Religion
Morals
Morals and Emotions
On Good and Evil
Beliefs
The World As I See It
My Credo
Einstein's Faith
Short Comments on Einstein's Faith
Spinoza and Einstein
Einstein's Last Thoughts
Miscellaneous
Belief Breeds Intolerance
Miscellaneous Comments
Bibliography
Web einsteinandreligion.com
Spinoza and Einstein
Einstein's Poem About Spinoza
From Jammer, p. 43; the complete poem is available in German in the Appendix of the book.
How much do I love that noble man
More than I could tell with words
I fear though he'll remain alone
With a holy halo of his own.
Why Einstein Admires Spinoza
From a letter to Dr. Dagobert Runes, Sept. 8, 1932, Einstein Archive, reel 33-286, quoted in Jammer, pp. 44 - 45
When asked to write short essay on "the ethical significance of Spinoza's philosophy," Einstein replied:
I do not have the professional knowledge to write a scholarly article about Spinoza. But what I think about this man I can express in a few words. Spinoza was the first to apply with strict consistency the idea of an all-pervasive determinism to human thought, feeling, and action. In my opinion, his point of view has not gained general acceptance by all those striving for clarity and logical rigor only because it requires not only consistency of thought, but also unusual integrity, magnamity, and — modesty.
The God of Einstein and Spinoza
From a letter to Eduard Büsching, Oct. 25, 1929, Einstein Archive, reel 33-275, quoted in Jammer, p. 51:
When its author sent a book There Is No God to Einstein, Einstein replied that the book did not deal with the notion of God, but only with that of a personal God. He suggested that the book should be titled There Is No Personal God. He added further:
We followers of Spinoza see out God in the wonderful order and lawfulness of all that exists and in its soul as it reveals itself in man and animal.
Einstein's View of God — and Spinoza's
---
From a letter to Murray W. Gross, Apr. 26, 1947, Einstein Archive, reel 33-324, Jammer, p. 138 - 139:When question about God and religion on behalf of an aged Talmudic scholar, Einstein replied:
It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropomorphic concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere.
On Loving Your Enemies
Upon a friend commending the Christian maxim "Love they enemy" Einstein replied:
I agree with your remark about loving your enemy as far as actions are concerned. But for me the cognitive basis is the trust in an unrestricted causality. 'I cannot hate him, because he must do what he does.' That means for me more Spinoza than the prophets.
Source for the Spinoza Reference
I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.
The quotation above may be Einstein's most familiar statement of his beliefs. These words are frequently quoted, but a citation is seldom given. The quotation can be found in Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp (The Open Court Publishing Co., La Salle, Illinois, Third Edition, 1970) pp. 659 - 660. There the source is given as the New York Times, 25 April 1929, p. 60, col. 4. Ronald W. Clark (pp. 413-414) gives a detailed account of the origin of Einstein's statement:
While the argument over his birthday present had been going on, the theory of relativity had been used to pull him into a religious controversy from which there emerged one of his much-quoted statements of faith. It began when Cardinal O'Connell of Boston, who had attacked Einstein's General Theory on previous occasions, told a group of Catholics that it "cloaked the ghastly apparition of atheism" and "befogged speculation, producing universal doubt about God and His Creation." Einstein, who had often reiterated his remark of 1921 to Archbishop Davidson-"It makes no difference. It is purely abstract science"-was at first uninterested. Then, on April 24, Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue, New York, faced Einstein with the simple five-word cablegram: "Do you believe in God?"
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists," he replied, "not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."
Years later he expanded this in a letter …. "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," he wrote. "[But] 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 to human reason."
A further quotation on the subject of Spinoza's god follows. This material comes from G. S. Viereck, Glimpses of the Great (Macauley, New York, 1930), quoted by Brian, p. 186.
You might want to take this quotation with a grain of salt. According to Brian, the Americanized German Viereck became known as a "big-name hunter" after "capturing" Kaiser Wilhelm II; Premier Georges Clemenceau of France; Henry Ford; Sigmund Freud, the inventor of psychoanalysis; and the playwright George Bernard Shaw. Because of his desire to interview the great and because of his inordinate egotism, Freud accused him of having a "superman complex." Upton Sinclear referred to him as "a pompous liar and hypocrite," and George Bernard Shaw questioned his accuracy.
Is the quotation authentic? For what it's worth, here it is.
When asked whether he believes in the God of Spinoza, Einstein is supposed to have replied as follows:
I can't answer with a simple yes or no. 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 different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. 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.
Did Einstein actually say this? The nonsense phrase "mysterious force that moves the constellations" troubles me. This seems much more likely to have been inserted by the scientifically ignorant Viereck than it does something that Einstein would say.
The Viereck interview with Einstein appeared first in the Saturday Evening Post (Oct. 26, 1929, p.17) under the title "What Life Means to Einstein."It is curious that Einstein's statement about Spinoza does not appear in that article. Did Viereck choose not include it? Did Einstein object to its inclusion in the article? Or was the Spinoza material removed by the editors?
I have chosen to enter the quotation on this page, because it is found in several places on the net. Perhaps someone who has seen it elsewhere, can learn here that there is some question about the accuracy of the statement.
The quotation may not be completely inauthentic. It seems improbable that Viereck could have recorded Einstein's answer verbatim during an interview. Surely Viereck would have taken brief abbreviated notes that he expanded later. Or perhaps he jotted down the conversation at some time afterwards, putting down Einstein's answers from memory. In neither case would you expect 100% accuracy.
I don't think that Viereck would have made up the statement out of whole cloth. What would be the point? The quotation is not particularly striking. There's nothing that Viereck could regard as a coup in obtaining. The quotation is merely a statement of views that Einstein was not shy about expressing and would later express again at many other times and in many other ways.
The simile of the child in a library seems like the quintessential Einstein. It is not something that Viereck would or could make up. Einstein's praise of Spinoza for treating body and soul as a single unit seems genuine too, and unlikely to be a creation of Viereck.
Material from the Viereck interview is reproduced in Brian and also in Jammer. Both books are based on extensive research, but neither book reports that Einstein ever disavowed anything attributed to him by George Viereck. In fact Brian reports that Einstein confirmed part of the interview. See Brian pp. 277 - 278.
Is the quotation something that Einstein really said? Maybe not — at least not exactly in the words that Viereck attributes to him. Nevertheless, the quotation seems to be consistent with Einstein's views. Certain elements of the quotation could come from no one but Einstein. While the statement may not be exactly verbatim, it cannot differ very greatly from what Einstein actually said.
Edited by Arnold V. Lesikar,
Professor Emeritus
Dept. of Physics, Astronomy, and Engineering Science,
St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, MN 56301-4498
Feedback to: lesikar@stcloudstate.edu
