Einstein’s Famous Quote About Science and Religion

[Age]

I do not think there was any ambiguity in Einstein's statement if one has read enough about him. Steven Hawking stated he shares the same sense of a religious feeling a spiritual feeling while stating that religion is for those who are afraid of the dark. The desert religions are keeping a deem night light burning for the unspiritual fearful faithful.

“God was always invented to explain mystery. God is always invented to explain
those things that you do not understand. Now, when you finally discover
how something works … you don't need him anymore. But … you leave him to create
the universe because we haven't figured that out yet.”
/Richard P. Feynman/

But HOW the Universe CREATES has been figured out.

[Age]

Iwannaplato,
No answer would ever be complete and relevant to a theist for evidence to them is irrelevant.
That is probably because it is an emotional position and not a reasonable one.

"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt."
/Richard P. Feynman/

WHY do you quote "others" as though what they say is IRREFUTABLY True. This is EXACTLY what "theists" say and do. "It is written in 'the book', therefore it MUST BE true.“ The ABSURDITY OF, speaks for itself.

[Age]

bobmacs,

Necessarily true as all meaning is the property of the subject.

by the way, welcome!!!

Thank you!

I think there is something more ...

Because the Truth is the same Being. It can only be so.

But you just told us that 'the Truth' is not something and so is nothing, so how does this relate now to you telling us that 'the Truth' is the SAME 'Being'?

Is 'Being' nothing, or, something?

And since in essence I am Being ... the Truth can only hide within me, it is what I really am.

What you are getting to, essentially, is True. But you are going about it in such a TWISTED and DISTORTED way that it is NOT working.

[Age]

It seemed like a quote intended as communication between atheists or non-believers, at least also. I don't think it's a great idea for people who are taking the rational high ground. 'You people......(or 'Those people....) are not very rational.' And while doing that mind read and do a poor incomplete job of it. I was not evaluating it as a weak argument to convince theists they are wrong. I was evaluating it as including an assertion I don't think is correct and futher is a kind of mind reading. You wanna take the high ground, then live up to the criteria you are judging others for not using. I can't tell you how much I read atheists proclaiming things that don't seem at all correct to me (about theists and others) while also engaging in what amounts to mind reading or fallacious logic. It's kinda like...my team is right about this main issue, so I can say whatever I want and I don't have to live up to my own epistemology because...my team is right.

I can't see how that does anything good for anyone except perhaps it's cathartic for the speaker.

Iwannaplato,
Simply provide evidence for your beliefs and my statement is defuncted. You should if you wish to be honest decide how you get to your belief, if it is not by intellectual means or emotional means then please indicate by what means.

What part of my statement that you responded to was incorrect? I was responding to Feynman saying that theists believe in God because we still don't have an explanation for the origin of the universe.

The REASON WHY 'you', human beings, do NOT have an explanation for the origin of the Universe IS because there was NO ACTUAL 'origin to the Universe', in relation to It 'beginning'.

WHEN 'you', human beings, move PAST YOUR ASSUMING and BELIEVING that It DID BEGIN, then 'you' can MOVE ALONG to DISCOVERING and UNDERSTANDING what thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth REALLY IS.

I said.....

If that is meant to explain why theists believe in God, it is a very incomplete answer and irrelevant to many theists.

and you responded.

Iwannaplato,
No answer would ever be complete and relevant to a theist for evidence to them is irrelevant. That is probably because it is an emotional position and not a reasonable one.

Feel free to demonstrate that what Feynman said is true for most theists and is a complete assessment.
I think he engaged in a poor mind reading attempt.

Your response here comes off as if you didn't read what I wrote. You seem to be, I don't know, but it seems to be just a kind of challenge to demonstrate God exists, which I didn't write about. I critiqued Feynman and then explained in greater detail why I did. If your not interested in any of that fine.

[Age]

A conscious subject is the source of all meanings. Being applies to all objects and objects are the creation of organic beings.

The subject cannot be the source of meanings.
As it is always and only the object that provides meaning.
The object is all there is.
Things, thoughts, emotions, desires ... are always and only objects.

While the subject is only implied.

It is the object that is the source of all meaning.
The object consists precisely in its own meanings. Nothing but this.

Even the subject can have a meaning only by objectifying it.
In itself the subject is a pure nothing. A nothing where every object is mirrored.

'you' and "dontaskme" will get along just great here.

[bobmax]

Age,

What is simple is always difficult.

It seems to me that for you what is simple must be easy.
This is not the case at all!

Simplicity requires great effort and even suffering.

Because it is necessary to go to the limits of the understandable.

There is a fundamental difference between existing and being.

There is only what is something. While being cannot be something! And what is not something ... for existence it is nothing.

Of ways that, albeit paradoxically: Being = Nothing.

But be careful!
Nothing means only non-existence. Just this.

Since being is the same being true: Being = Truth

Therefore: Being = Nothing = Truth

This is not Nihilism!
But the acceptance of the nihilistic challenge.

Which asks you what the Truth is then.
It's just up to you to say it.

Truth needs you!

[Iwannaplato]

Iwannaplato,

If this is so I do apologize, but were you inferring that faith is rational, the problem I have with believers is they claim apparently that their faith is not arrived at intellectually nor is it based on emotion so I ask by what means. It sounds like I do owe you an apology and you certainly have it.

Thank you, and no worries. I think the Christian idea of faith is very odd and also I think that it is fairly unique amongst the world's religions. It's an interesting topic, but not one I want to go in here. At least not much. Some use faith to mean something like intuition, though if you ask them they often will point to experiences they have of the presence of God or Jesus (or other versions of the deity) so there is an empirical aspect often, even for people who use the word faith over and over. Hindus might use the word faith, but their whole religion, if they are serious practitioners is extremely empirical. (just because something is experience-based it doesn't mean the conclusions are correct or the interpretations). They have practices that are followed with the discipline of people learning the violin and these are meant to lead to an experience of the deity and even participation in the deity. Some people use faith to mean something outside the range of knowledge or belief. They have faith there is a God even if they see no evidence or even in the face of counterevidence (for them). Here I would say it is something like 'going on the assumption and continuing to relate to...' God, regardless even of one's own doubt. The dark night of the soul many mystics go through can include the total lack of belief in God, a hatred of God and more negative reactions to the deity. But one, according to some, can continue to have faith. So, it is in its own category. I find that strange but also I have respected some people who define faith that way.

There are likely other versions of faith. But it is not in all forms of theism, though some people will use the word in a way that does apply to any religious person.

[socrat44]

There is only what is something. While being cannot be something! And what is not something ... for existence it is nothing.

Of ways that, albeit paradoxically: Being = Nothing.

But be careful!
Nothing means only non-existence. Just this.

Since being is the same being true: Being = Truth

Therefore: Being = Nothing = Truth

Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

[Age]

Age,

What is simple is always difficult.

It seems to me that for you what is simple must be easy.
This is not the case at all!

Simplicity requires great effort and even suffering.

Because it is necessary to go to the limits of the understandable.

There is a fundamental difference between existing and being.

There is only what is something. While being cannot be something! And what is not something ... for existence it is nothing.

Of ways that, albeit paradoxically: Being = Nothing.

But be careful!
Nothing means only non-existence. Just this.

Since being is the same being true: Being = Truth

Therefore: Being = Nothing = Truth

This is not Nihilism!
But the acceptance of the nihilistic challenge.

Which asks you what the Truth is then.
It's just up to you to say it.

Truth needs you!

"dontaskme" is going to LOVE you.

[bobmax]

Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

It is not just a physical matter.
That being does not exist, that is, there is nowhere, is above all an ethical necessity.

It is about the Absolute!

While existence is inherently relative. If it were absolute, then nihilism would be right: nothing would have value.

Nihilism is the inevitable outcome of the rational mind that does not want to deceive itself.

But nihilism must be faced precisely on its own ground, questioning the "truth" on which it is based.
And this "truth" is 2.

But love knows that 2 has no reality.

[popeye1945]

In fact subject and object can never be considered separate . . .

I do understand your point of posting body mind spirit in response to my statement?

[Dontaskme]

There is only what is something. While being cannot be something! And what is not something ... for existence it is nothing.

Of ways that, albeit paradoxically: Being = Nothing.

But be careful!
Nothing means only non-existence. Just this.

Since being is the same being true: Being = Truth

Therefore: Being = Nothing = Truth

Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

“Nothing” is just another word for “Everything”

“pairs” is a conceptual duality where opposites must exist at the same time for knowledge to be possible.

[Iwannaplato]

Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

There is no nothingness. Even vaccuum spaces are actually not vaccuums, but have particles/antiparticle pairs and energies flitting in and out of existence. As Quantum Physics claims.

[Age]

Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

There is no nothingness. Even vaccuum spaces are actually not vaccuums, but have particles/antiparticle pairs and energies flitting in and out of existence. As Quantum Physics claims.

When there is a 'space' and for the moment where the particles/antiparticle pairs and energies are not in existence, then what is that 'space' if it is not a 'vacuum space'?

[bobmax]

Being = Nothingness/Emptiness, is true only in the Cosmic Vacuum, as Quantum Physics claims.

There is no nothingness. Even vaccuum spaces are actually not vaccuums, but have particles/antiparticle pairs and energies flitting in and out of existence. As Quantum Physics claims.

When there is a 'space' and for the moment where the particles/antiparticle pairs and energies are not in existence, then what is that 'space' if it is not a 'vacuum space'?

Existence consists in the continuous play of opposites.

Like the one between empty and full.

Opposites give meaning to existence. But in themselves ... they don't exist.

I look for matter and I find vacuum, I look for vacumm and I find matter.

This is the game of Being, the game of Nothingness.