Your program on Einstein does a grave disservice to those eager to gain an intellectually honest understanding of what one of our greatest thinkers opined about God. The very reference in your program description to Einstein�s �wisdom on � the mind of God� utterly violates what Einstein intended by the term �God�. Einstein would have argued that �the mind of God� is an oxymoron; he repeatedly, specifically, and emphatically rejected the concept of a God in possession of a �mind�. In your endeavor to make an ally of God to those �of faith� you are not alone. Believers have long sought support for their cosmological conceits from Einstein by mining his writings selectively for the odd comment that, taken out of context, suggests he shared their views. He did not. Einstein used the word �God� similarly to the way Spinoza did, simply as a convenient euphemism for the sum of natural laws. The Jewish leaders of the day excommunicated Spinoza for espousing that view, and from their standpoint they did so with very good reason. For Spinoza�s �God� bore very little resemblance to that of believers in and defenders of God as conceived in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Einstein arguably went even further than Spinoza. He flatly rejected any notion of God that entailed anything other than an equivalence to the natural laws of the universe � those known, those undiscovered yet, and even those that might prove unknowable. He specifically rejected any belief, frequently imputed to him of a God possessing a consciousness, a God who would hear or respond to prayers, who knew of or intervened in the events of daily life. (Some people characterize this as a �personal God�, and Einstein himself used that term. But the aspects of God he rejected went beyond the merely �personal�.) One gets the sense that, having used the word �God� euphemistically � and considering what he opined about the concept in the context of all that he wrote about it, not just on the basis of a few selectively extracted snippets, it�s absolutely clear that for him it was, indeed, euphemistic � he regretted it for the rest of his life. As Richard Dawkins quotes in The God Delusion: �It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God� If there�s is something in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.� And: �I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuine religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism.� As these quotes make plain � and far from cherry-picking, I have cited just two of countless other similarly expressed views � �religious� and �God� for Einstein bear almost no relationship to what those terms mean to the traditionally religious or �spiritual� (another term so ill-defined it has virtually no meaning other than as a code word for �religious� used by people who implicitly feel that, being a bit more recondite, it�s similarly a bit more elevated.) In summary, anyone interested in presenting what Einstein really believed would refrain from even writing the phrase �Einstein�s wisdom on � the mind of God�.
More information about text formats