• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Einstien on Religion

Psychonaut Shaman

Bluelighter
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
6
This is taken from a book caled "Ideas and Opinions", by Albert Einstien.

To set up the following, he was first talking about how religion was fear based and then how some, particularly those in the Far East, developed into being moral based. Then goes on to say that Budhism was the closest that came to this;

In general, only individuals of exceptional endowments, and exceptionally high-minded communities, rise to any considerable extent above this level. But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it COSMIC religious feeling. It is very difficult to elucidate this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it. The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought.

Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prision and he wants to experience the Universe as a single significant whole. In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive for those who are receptive to it. The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment enertain the idea of a God who interferes in the course of events-provided, of course, that he takes the hypothesis of casaulity really seriously. He has no use for the religion of fear and equally for moral religion.

A God who rewards and punishes is inconcievable to him for the simple reason that a mans actions are determined by necessity, external and internal, so that in Gods eyes he cannot be held in judgment for the motions anymore than an inanimate object is held in judgment for it's motions. (like the growth of a tree). A mans ethical behavior should be based effectually on compassion, education and societies needs: no religious basis is neccesary.

Man would indeed be in a poor way if had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. Kepler and Newton must have had to enable themselves to spend years of solitary labor in distangling the principles of celestial mechanics.

Such men have shown the way to kindred spirits scattered wide throughout the world and centuries. Only one who has devoted his life to similar ends can have a vivid realization of what inspired these men and given them the strength to remain true to their purpose in spite of countless failures. It is COSMIC religious feeling that gives man such strength.

End of exerpt
 
I am no one to match Einstien on an intellectual level, I consider myself somewhat stupid actually. One big flaw that I see though, which is common in western man is the belief that everything is dead instead of the realization that everything is alive.

Someone as spiritual as you appear to be in your recent posts should have figured that out ;)
 
There was a show earlier this month about einsteine's wife, and the possiblity that she wasnt only a scientific genious who supported him, but may have played a part in inventing some of his theories, or even the inventor of them.

Though the whole topic is interesting, as where do you draw the line between the bible, jesus and the church. What was the original message, and why did the church so actively destroy its spirtual heritage and the spiritual traditions of other social groups.
 
I was going to buy that book. Looks good, I guess I'll buy it tomorrow then.
Maybe Einstein wasn't a total fool.

BTW I know he had a GF, but didn't know he was married.
 
Void said:
There was a show earlier this month about einsteine's wife, and the possiblity that she wasnt only a scientific genious who supported him, but may have played a part in inventing some of his theories, or even the inventor of them.

Alot of the information on the show was factually innaccurate, although she very well may have played a big role in his scientific achievements .
 
Einstein was married twice, first to physicist Mileva Maric and afterwards to Elsa Lowenthal. His second wife was also his cousin. And he was a genius... :D
 
wtf^^^prove it,i dont believe you although im not sure i can really dissagree either, so lets see some proof.

einstein wasnt very bright for the fact that he had to use big ass words that some couldnt understand when he could have been alot simpler and it would have made just as much sence.any moron can put big words together and give them meaning when his brain is matching the right connections together.einstein was just another human being but he could form deaper, more complexe thoughts with bigger meanings but it doesnt mean hes right now does it?he does a whole lot of talking and shows absolutely no evidence.just because you cant understand what hes saying doesnt mean he knows more than you.he experiences the same world as any other person but has a way of fitting complex things together that make some sort of logic, but forms absolutlely no evidence.i dont beleive einstein was the smartest man either,i simply beleive he was very good at creating logical and complex connections within his mind but thats all automatic anyways.

he doesnt even explain what cosmic religion is but he has a whole lot to say about what it does.....seems a bit vaugue to me.

Psychonaut Shaman why dont you explain to us in your own words what you got from this peice of writing, i dont like reading out of books then asked what i think about it by someone else who doesnt even tell us what he himself thinks.

i agree with you DigitalDuality, everything IS alive and is in a constant regeneration/renewing of itself.everything just keeps going as a whole, a rock is as important and within the circle/pattern of life just as much as a human is.matter is constantly, evenly distributing energy within all lifeforms to sustain its creation of itself.western man does have a massive ego and is all about itself.nothing else matters but the human life, human psychology and human morals and staying ocupied with itself(western man)we have forgotten of what keeps us alive.

To set up the following, he was first talking about how religion was fear based and then how some, particularly those in the Far East, developed into being moral based. Then goes on to say that Budhism was the closest that came to this;

that is his perspective, doesnt mean hes right does it?unless you ignorantly believe him simply because it makes a bit of sence but his saying that buddhism is moral based is simply opinion.who does he think he is classifying religions like that?for a fact i know that eistein believes a god did create all that is.i dont believe buddhism is simply moral based like he states, i believe that buddhism is a way of getting in touch with everything that exists.i believe buddhism is a way of clearing the mind of illusions and accending into a higher state of conscience and perspective, elliminating morals of right and wrong and seeing everything as a learning experience to gain a higher sence of being.jjst cuz i say this doesnt mean its true and i know its understandable therefor making it easier to base an opinion.

maybe einstein was thought to be the smartest man because not many could question his logic and understanding but with time anything can be simplified.thats is what i think einsteins greatest flaw would be, only explaining his logic in terms of science and opinion.

i may be wrong but u might be too.
 
You gotta understand that to Einstein everything was a matter of perspective in the first place. As he writes in his Theory of Relativiy, everything is relative to perspective. That being said he was expressing his one perspective the best way he could. As for his work, just because you can't fully comprehend it doesn't mean it other people can't. Much of physics has used Einstein's work as a foundation for macrophysics.
 
einstein wasnt very bright for the fact that he had to use big ass words that some couldnt understand when he could have been alot simpler and it would have made just as much sence.any moron can put big words together and give them meaning when his brain is matching the right connections together.einstein was just another human being but he could form deaper, more complexe thoughts with bigger meanings but it doesnt mean hes right now does it?he does a whole lot of talking and shows absolutely no evidence.just because you cant understand what hes saying doesnt mean he knows more than you

No one is always right, but disputing the intelligence and genius of that man is rather wrong i believe. Not any man can do the mathematics he could do.

The gap between Neitzsche and the average man, is normally a larger gap than the average man is to a monkey. That's not to say we all don't have our talents and strengths, that under the right conditions our human potential could equal or excel these geniuses, but no, not everyone adds up to that intellectual level.

Stringing "big words" together-- as exaggerated as you made him out to be with that, is more difficult than you would think. If it was so simple, i'm pretty sure people in trailer parks and ghettos worldwide would begin doing so in order to be taken more seriously in the world when it comes to the needs of the poor that recieve low public funding in their education.
 
Eistein was a flat out genious. His theories have completely modernized science. I simply cannot understand how anybody could say that he wasn't very bright.. he was on an entirely different wavelength than like 99.99% of human beings that have ever lived.. its just fact.
 
A God who rewards and punishes is inconcievable to him for the simple reason that a mans actions are determined by necessity, external and internal, so that in Gods eyes he cannot be held in judgment for the motions anymore than an inanimate object is held in judgment for it's motions. (like the growth of a tree). A mans ethical behavior should be based effectually on compassion, education and societies needs: no religious basis is neccesary.

Man would indeed be in a poor way if had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. Kepler and Newton must have had to enable themselves to spend years of solitary labor in distangling the principles of celestial mechanics.

I tend to agree with him there. As I also believe religions are imaginative creations originally designed to aid in the construction of a moral society capable of self-organization, the concept of a god who rewards and punishes is thus necessary for such a religion (how do you control someone if they have no fear?) but the idea is absurd that a God can be held to judge a man acting only out of need - the argument is flawed, however, if for example one man needed to kill another for food, where do you draw the line? tough question

I'm not sure if I totally agree with the cosmic religous feeling, though, it's a very idealist opinion...effectively shunning the physical, tangible, materialist world and revelling in the wonders of 'reality' in thought and imagination. Since I'm not an idealist by nature of consciousness the idea doesn't sit with me as well
 
ok sure but remember that his theories are just that, theories.he doesnt have a solid ounce of evidence other than the math equasions he could write.did anybody check his math work anyways??if he was MR big geniuse guy then how could his work be checked or not???how could anyone prove him wrong when he was supposed to be on a higher mental ground than all humanity???

i still dont understand the logic to this whole einstein on religion.he doesnt even explain his main topic, COSMIC.

In general, only individuals of exceptional endowments, and exceptionally high-minded communities, rise to any considerable extent above this level. But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it COSMIC religious feeling.

wtf is he talking about.he says that only exceptionaly highminded blessed people will rise above a the 2 levels of religion(one being fear and the other being morals)these individuals will have a sense of COSMIC religiouse feeling although its not found is PURE form.WTF does COSMIC mean and what the hell is he rambling about it being pure?!?!?! was it turned into a damn pill with fillers or somebullshit.youd think a smart ass scientist would know an extraction method??, he doesnt even explain it although this whole thing is based on how it is so great and how theres something wrong with a religion of fear and a religion of morals.how the hell does he know??!?!?!?!was he christian, then he converted to buddhism then he suddenly became a fucking COSMIC?!?!?!that is preaty damn lame if you ask me.

The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment enertain the idea of a God who interferes in the course of events-provided, of course, that he takes the hypothesis of casaulity really seriously. He has no use for the religion of fear and equally for moral religion.

ohh so now he know everything about god and religion does he?why does he connect religion with god.its like he thinks that all religions are the same and he can classify them and then say that they all worship the same god.when did god ever interfere with human events that he can remember????he doesnt know that.....if you ask me i think hes a bit narrow minded and doesnt take the time to think over each bit of logic he puts together from different perspectives.its like he thinks his perspective is the absolute and he never states anything that say he might be wrong.

id read the rest but i dont feel like breaking everything down into a simple, understandable form.i think this guy gets way to much credit and is taken way to seriously.all einstein comes up with are theories which absolutly has nothing to do with being correct unless there are tests done.how the hell are you gonna test if god even exists???how the hell are you gonna test if hes not smoking rocks when he came up with the COSMIC.he was prolly just trippin.fucking COSMIC, gimme a break

AND BY THE WAY, NONE OF YOU HAVE EVEN COME UP WITH ANYTHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE TOPIC.........YOU GUYS SURE ARE QUICK TO KISS "MR SMARTYPANTS" ASS

No one is always right, but disputing the intelligence and genius of that man is rather wrong i believe. Not any man can do the mathematics he could do.

haaaaaaa your telling me im wrong for questioning this guys logic on god yet you havnt come up with fuck all eccept something to say about my questioning which seems rather logical in my mind, but thats only me.

anyways this guy gets to much credit, shit i come up with some of his thoughts and throw them away like its nothing but when this guy comes up with something its straight to the thesaurus.
 
This is taken from a book caled "Ideas and Opinions", by Albert Einstien.

ideas and opinions. His opinion obviously differs from yours, and mine from both. He was definitely a very intelligent man, I don't think that can be disputed. I believe what he was trying to say was if you are able to transcend the first two levels of religion (as it progresses chronologically with the advancement of societal structure, from a religion used to control to a religion based around a set of moral values etc.) then you reach this 'cosmic' level where the trivialities of religion are irrelevant and you become, effectively enlightened, somewhat like nirvana I guess. Keep in mind this guy was a dreamer, an idealist -

The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought.

essentially he's saying that when you reach this cosmic level you realize how wonderful nature and thinking is, which is a pretty vague definition yeah...I think he's referring more to a certain mindset and attitude towards life that revels in the beauty of nature and thought, a very romantic ideal

either way, I agree it's all very vague
 
einstein was old when he eluded the hollucost, that is like saying an old man of today is not smart because he does not know how to use the internet. I imagine einstien was born before the car!

I saw a show giving credtit to his wives too, it was pretty loose on what where facts and myths, but it is safe to say that our "modern" guru was quite enriched by the presence of women.
 
Einstein was out of Europe well before the Holocaust. Besides Hitler wouldn't kill him. Hitler's scientists were almost all Jews. ;)

Thanks Kitty, I wasn't aware he was so American.:p
 
_high_life_ said:
ok sure but remember that his theories are just that, theories.he doesnt have a solid ounce of evidence other than the math equasions he could write.
Who has evidence for anything? Can you even prove to me your own existance? His math equations are for his other book(s), Theory of Relativity, obviously something you aren't too familiar with.

[B}
did anybody check his math work anyways??[/B]
Yes years of Scientific Method has checked, rechecked, and then checked again all his math.

if he was MR big geniuse guy then how could his work be checked or not???how could anyone prove him wrong when he was supposed to be on a higher mental ground than all humanity???
It's alot easier to work math out than to come out with new equations and theorems.


i still dont understand the logic to this whole einstein on religion.he doesnt even explain his main topic, COSMIC.

In general, only individuals of exceptional endowments, and exceptionally high-minded communities, rise to any considerable extent above this level. But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it COSMIC religious feeling.

wtf is he talking about.he says that only exceptionaly highminded blessed people will rise above a the 2 levels of religion(one being fear and the other being morals)these individuals will have a sense of COSMIC religiouse feeling although its not found is PURE form.WTF does COSMIC mean and what the hell is he rambling about it being pure?!?!?!

Cosmic - adj.
1. Of or relating to the universe, especially as distinct from Earth.

2. Infinitely or inconceivably extended; vast:

What he probably means about certain people is that certain environments will mold certain types of people, some of these people are more likely to experience Cosmic Experiences.

Who knows what he means by it being pure I would have to read it in context with the rest of the book.

[B}he doesnt even explain it although this whole thing is based on how it is so great and how theres something wrong with a religion of fear and a religion of morals.how the hell does he know??!?!?!?!was he christian, then he converted to buddhism then he suddenly became a fucking COSMIC?!?!?!that is preaty damn lame if you ask me.[/B]
Your first sentence is incomprehendable.

I think it's lame when people just assume things like someone being a Christain and then calling them lame solely based on their narrow minded assumptions. At least give some objective thoughts on why you think it's lame so other people can follow.

[/B]The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment enertain the idea of a God who interferes in the course of events-provided, of course, that he takes the hypothesis of casaulity really seriously. He has no use for the religion of fear and equally for moral religion.[/B]

ohh so now he know everything about god and religion does he?why does he connect religion with god.its like he thinks that all religions are the same and he can classify them and then say that they all worship the same god.when did god ever interfere with human events that he can remember????he doesnt know that.....if you ask me i think hes a bit narrow minded and doesnt take the time to think over each bit of logic he puts together from different perspectives.its like he thinks his perspective is the absolute and he never states anything that say he might be wrong.
[B}
Would you like to back that up with some logical thought, what you think is useless in a forum unless you give an explanation other people can relate to.

id read the rest but i dont feel like breaking everything down into a simple, understandable form.[/B}

Why not try to look at it collectively?


No one is always right, but disputing the intelligence and genius of that man is rather wrong i believe. Not any man can do the mathematics he could do.

haaaaaaa your telling me im wrong for questioning this guys logic on god yet you havnt come up with fuck all eccept something to say about my questioning which seems rather logical in my mind, but thats only me.
how about you share some of this logic you talk about, I don't see too much of it.

anyways this guy gets to much credit, shit i come up with some of his thoughts and throw them away like its nothing but when this guy comes up with something its straight to the thesaurus. [/B]
That's because he is an accomplished scientist. It doesn't seem like you are too familiar with physics or even what he really did for physics.
 
No.. someone is arguing that. I think it's the know it all syndrome..If high life can by himself, challenge the theory of relativity, i might applaud his claims, but until then...
 
Top