What do you think?
Rate this book
Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology
The philosophy of religion and the quest for spiritual truth preoccupied Albert Einstein--so much that it has been said "one might suspect he was a disguised theologian." Nevertheless, the literature on the life and work of Einstein, extensive as it is, does not provide an adequate account of his religious conception and sentiments. Only fragmentarily known, Einstein's ideas about religion have been often distorted both by atheists and by religious groups eager to claim him as one of their own. But what exactly was Einstein's religious credo? In this fascinating book, the distinguished physicist and philosopher Max Jammer offers an unbiased and well-documented answer to this question.
The book begins with a discussion of Einstein's childhood religious education and the religious atmosphere--or its absence--among his family and friends. It then reconstructs, step by step, the intellectual development that led Einstein to the conceptions of a cosmic religion and an impersonal God, akin to "the God of Spinoza." Jammer explores Einstein's writings and lectures on religion and its role in society, and how far they have been accepted by the general public and by professional theologians like Paul Tillich or Frederick Ferré. He also analyzes the precise meaning of Einstein's famous dictum "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind," and why this statement can serve as an epitome of Einstein's philosophy of religion.
The last chapter deals with the controversial question of whether Einstein's scientific work, and in particular his theory of relativity, has theologically significant implications, a problem important for those who are interested in the relation between science and religion. Both thought-provoking and engaging, this book aims to introduce readers, without proselytizing, to Einstein's religion.
The book begins with a discussion of Einstein's childhood religious education and the religious atmosphere--or its absence--among his family and friends. It then reconstructs, step by step, the intellectual development that led Einstein to the conceptions of a cosmic religion and an impersonal God, akin to "the God of Spinoza." Jammer explores Einstein's writings and lectures on religion and its role in society, and how far they have been accepted by the general public and by professional theologians like Paul Tillich or Frederick Ferré. He also analyzes the precise meaning of Einstein's famous dictum "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind," and why this statement can serve as an epitome of Einstein's philosophy of religion.
The last chapter deals with the controversial question of whether Einstein's scientific work, and in particular his theory of relativity, has theologically significant implications, a problem important for those who are interested in the relation between science and religion. Both thought-provoking and engaging, this book aims to introduce readers, without proselytizing, to Einstein's religion.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
16 people are currently reading
303 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
August 25, 2021
"علم بدونِ مذهب لنگ است و مذهب بدونِ علم کور"
در نظر اینشتین علم به مثابه ابزاری است که لازمه رسیدن به مقصود است اما علم در برداشتن قدمِ آخر می لَنگَد!. آن چیزی که تکمیل کننده ی راهِ علم است و کارِ نیمه تمام را تمام می کند مذهب است. مذهب است که هدف را تعیین میکند. علم و مذهب کارِ خود را مستقل انجام میدهند و هیچ تضادی بین آنها نیست.
اما اینشتین نوعِ خاصّی از مذهب که آن را احساسِ مذهبی آفرینش می نامد را در نظر دارد و آن را مکمّل علم میداند.
درباره کتاب : متنِ ترجمه کامل نیست و بنظر فصل هایی از کتاب حذف شده است. متنِ کتاب قابلِ فهم است جز فصلی با عنوانِ "تئوری های فیزیکی اینشتین و خداشناسی" که نیاز به پیش زمینه هایی در فیزیک دارد و من آن را نفهمیدم.
در نظر اینشتین علم به مثابه ابزاری است که لازمه رسیدن به مقصود است اما علم در برداشتن قدمِ آخر می لَنگَد!. آن چیزی که تکمیل کننده ی راهِ علم است و کارِ نیمه تمام را تمام می کند مذهب است. مذهب است که هدف را تعیین میکند. علم و مذهب کارِ خود را مستقل انجام میدهند و هیچ تضادی بین آنها نیست.
اما اینشتین نوعِ خاصّی از مذهب که آن را احساسِ مذهبی آفرینش می نامد را در نظر دارد و آن را مکمّل علم میداند.
درباره کتاب : متنِ ترجمه کامل نیست و بنظر فصل هایی از کتاب حذف شده است. متنِ کتاب قابلِ فهم است جز فصلی با عنوانِ "تئوری های فیزیکی اینشتین و خداشناسی" که نیاز به پیش زمینه هایی در فیزیک دارد و من آن را نفهمیدم.
April 3, 2022
A very thorough & interesting book.
Einstein was, in some respects, similar to the Deists (although not completely identical). Sure, he didn’t believe in a personal deity; just, he was, explicitly, not an atheist. It is wrong to consider him to be a theist simply because he used the word “God” frequently; also, it is wrong to think he was just metaphorically juggling with this word. His biographer Isaacson states he was like the 18th C US founding fathers. Personally, I don’t think it is an apt analogy. Einstein, as far as we can tell, was closer to Spinoza and -this is my observation- early, naturalist Taoism of Lao-Tzu.
In short, according to him – there is an immanent Intelligence which “leads” (for wont of a better word) anything in this world. This Intelligence’s “ways” can be, to some degree, deciphered with our human intelligence (philosophy, science etc.). Just -and here his world-view differs from most theistic paradigms- this immanent Intelligence is not simultaneously transcendent- therefore, it is not God in our usual sense (no transcendence- no God). According to Einstein: there are no supra-physical worlds; no personal God who somehow is concerned with human life & destiny; no immortality of the “soul”. Just, that immanent Intelligence does exist – and here it is where Einstein parts ways with atheists. His central world-view was, as I’ve said, something like naturalist pantheism of Spinoza or Lao-Tzu (not panentheism, nor classical theism).
Just- there is a possibility that Spinoza was misunderstood by many (most?) people. I don’t have an issue here because I don’t care for Spinoza’s world-view, which seems to me too scholastic & antiquated. But, let’s see: the dominant position is that Spinoza was a pantheist, and that for him there was just this, empirical world, which was equal to “God”. Therefore, no supra-physical anything, no transcendence, no nothing beyond. But, some newer investigations question that. They seem to aver that Spinoza was a panentheist, similar to Plotinus & Hegel, because Spinoza clearly differentiates between natura naturans (nature which creates) & natura naturata (the created nature). This is like a part of 4-fold panentheistic philosophy of John Scotus Erigena, which is, basically, neo-Platonism with all its baggage of non-empirical worlds, souls, divine beings, eternal destiny etc. In Spinoza’s case, it may be anything. I don’t know, maybe he just got caught in scholastic & Cartesian terminologies; on the other hand, he could have been a speculative mystic-rationalist in disguise.
As for the 18th C deists, they too were a diverse bunch. For most of them, God was the cause of all & did not intervene in this, empirical world. Much like Aristotle’s God. For many of them, this led to almost non-theistic conclusions- there was no afterlife & all religious drama was no more than imagination. Just, for some of them – this was not necessarily so. Other types of deists thought that, although God did not intervene in this, physical world, there are non-physical worlds galore, as well as heaven, hell, immortality, divine punishment etc.
Einstein was explicit that such speculations are beyond his field of interest.
Einstein was, in some respects, similar to the Deists (although not completely identical). Sure, he didn’t believe in a personal deity; just, he was, explicitly, not an atheist. It is wrong to consider him to be a theist simply because he used the word “God” frequently; also, it is wrong to think he was just metaphorically juggling with this word. His biographer Isaacson states he was like the 18th C US founding fathers. Personally, I don’t think it is an apt analogy. Einstein, as far as we can tell, was closer to Spinoza and -this is my observation- early, naturalist Taoism of Lao-Tzu.
In short, according to him – there is an immanent Intelligence which “leads” (for wont of a better word) anything in this world. This Intelligence’s “ways” can be, to some degree, deciphered with our human intelligence (philosophy, science etc.). Just -and here his world-view differs from most theistic paradigms- this immanent Intelligence is not simultaneously transcendent- therefore, it is not God in our usual sense (no transcendence- no God). According to Einstein: there are no supra-physical worlds; no personal God who somehow is concerned with human life & destiny; no immortality of the “soul”. Just, that immanent Intelligence does exist – and here it is where Einstein parts ways with atheists. His central world-view was, as I’ve said, something like naturalist pantheism of Spinoza or Lao-Tzu (not panentheism, nor classical theism).
Just- there is a possibility that Spinoza was misunderstood by many (most?) people. I don’t have an issue here because I don’t care for Spinoza’s world-view, which seems to me too scholastic & antiquated. But, let’s see: the dominant position is that Spinoza was a pantheist, and that for him there was just this, empirical world, which was equal to “God”. Therefore, no supra-physical anything, no transcendence, no nothing beyond. But, some newer investigations question that. They seem to aver that Spinoza was a panentheist, similar to Plotinus & Hegel, because Spinoza clearly differentiates between natura naturans (nature which creates) & natura naturata (the created nature). This is like a part of 4-fold panentheistic philosophy of John Scotus Erigena, which is, basically, neo-Platonism with all its baggage of non-empirical worlds, souls, divine beings, eternal destiny etc. In Spinoza’s case, it may be anything. I don’t know, maybe he just got caught in scholastic & Cartesian terminologies; on the other hand, he could have been a speculative mystic-rationalist in disguise.
As for the 18th C deists, they too were a diverse bunch. For most of them, God was the cause of all & did not intervene in this, empirical world. Much like Aristotle’s God. For many of them, this led to almost non-theistic conclusions- there was no afterlife & all religious drama was no more than imagination. Just, for some of them – this was not necessarily so. Other types of deists thought that, although God did not intervene in this, physical world, there are non-physical worlds galore, as well as heaven, hell, immortality, divine punishment etc.
Einstein was explicit that such speculations are beyond his field of interest.
May 11, 2011
Chapter 1 gives some interesting insight into the early education of Einstein, including his exposure to both Jewish and Christian religion.
Chapter 2 reveals how Einstein used his musical talent and his belief in beauty and symmetry in his quest for the "correct" equations for general relativity. Chapter 2 also debunks the misguided belief, held by many, that Einstein went to his grave with a strong conviction that quantum mechanics was just plain wrong. He actually proved some of the basic theorems of quantum mechanics.
Chapter 3 is a misguided attempt to explain the existence of G*d in therms of general relativity and 4-dimensional Minkowsky space. The author should have stopped after the second chapter.
Chapter 2 reveals how Einstein used his musical talent and his belief in beauty and symmetry in his quest for the "correct" equations for general relativity. Chapter 2 also debunks the misguided belief, held by many, that Einstein went to his grave with a strong conviction that quantum mechanics was just plain wrong. He actually proved some of the basic theorems of quantum mechanics.
Chapter 3 is a misguided attempt to explain the existence of G*d in therms of general relativity and 4-dimensional Minkowsky space. The author should have stopped after the second chapter.
September 26, 2008
One of the tougher reads I have ever attempted. Einstein has been claimed as one their own by both ends of theist - atheist debate. Reading his own words and the context around them was very helpfu.
March 19, 2017
Meskipun terjemahan bahasa Indonesia-nya bikin sakit mata, untungnya buku ini well-researched, netral, dan straight to the point. Bisa diringkas jadi satu paragraf sih. Tapi elaborasinya enak diikuti. #marikitajual #dor
April 12, 2025
Parts of the third chapter (and there are only three) get rather technical so the reader should be aware of that, but overall this is an accessible introduction to the deep end of the cosmological pool, so to speak. The first chapter is the easiest as it primarily deals with Einstein's own religious background and how his views developed, the second gets a little more difficult as it segues into some of what Einstein wrote and said about religion during his lifetime and the reaction to those statements, and the third deals with the ongoing controversies within physics about the theological ramifications (if any) of Einstein's views on space-time and the related controversies surrounding quantum mechanics. Of particular note is Einstein's lifelong commitment to a thoroughgoing causal determinism and his fondness for the views of Spinoza, and his corresponding lack of belief or interest in the idea of a personal deity. Einstein himself was something of a pantheist, or one of those whose religious yearnings were more than satisfied by the wonders of the universe itself, though he was never antagonistic toward religion in general. He tended to downplay the radicality of his own work as well as its religious implications.
to-keep-reference
September 19, 2018Para una discusión sobre los desacuerdos entre Einstein y Tillich.
Religión sin dios Pág.32
Religión sin dios Pág.32
November 14, 2023
Used lots of quotes, which I consider useful.
June 28, 2025
PERHAPS THE BEST SINGLE BOOK ON EINSTEIN'S THOUGHTS ABOUT RELIGION
Max Jammer is Professor of Physics Emeritus and former Rector at Bar-Ilan University in Israel. He wrote in the Introduction to this 1999 book, "Albert Einstein is generally regarded as the greatest theoretical physicist of the twentieth century... It is therefore not surprising that a great number of biographies ... have been written about Einstein's life and work... Yet, none of these biographies... gives an adequate account, if any, of an important facet of his life: his undogmatic and yet profound religiosity and his philosophy of religion... religious sentiments and theological reflections played a role of much greater importance than any of his biographers seems to have realized. To prove this contention ... is one of the objectives of this monograph..."
Jammer begins by noting that although Einstein's parents "never renounced their Jewish heritage, they did not observe traditional rites or dietary laws and never attended religious services at the synagogue." (Pg. 15) Einstein told an interviewer, "As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene [i.e., Jesus]." (Pg. 22) Jammer adds, "As far as we know, Einstein never attended religious services and never prayed in a synagogue or at any other place of worship... Einstein's last wish was not to be buried in the Jewish tradition, but to be cremated and his ashes scattered." (Pg. 27)
Einstein said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." (Pg. 31) He said to an inquirer, "behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in point of fact, religious." (Pg. 39-40) He told a rabbi who asked whether he believed in God, "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings." (Pg. 49)
In a 1930 essay printed in the New York Times (published as 'Einstein on Cosmic Religion and Other Opinions and Aphorisms'), "Einstein used... the term 'cosmic religious feeling' to describe the emotional state that one experiences when one recognizes the 'futility of human desires and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveals itself both in nature and in the world of thought.'" (Pg. 52) In a 1930 essay "What I Believe," he affirmed that "The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. Whoever does not know it and can no longer wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed... A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate... it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute true religiosity; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man. I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind we experience in ourselves." (Pg. 73)
In a 1940 article, he stated, "the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge." (Pg. 95) In rejecting the notion of a "personal" God, he added, "every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe---a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble." (Pg. 144)
This book, along with 'Einstein's God: Albert Einstein's Quest As a Scientist and As a Jew to Replace a Forsaken God,' is "essential reading" for anyone who wants to truly explore Einstein's thoughts about religion.
Max Jammer is Professor of Physics Emeritus and former Rector at Bar-Ilan University in Israel. He wrote in the Introduction to this 1999 book, "Albert Einstein is generally regarded as the greatest theoretical physicist of the twentieth century... It is therefore not surprising that a great number of biographies ... have been written about Einstein's life and work... Yet, none of these biographies... gives an adequate account, if any, of an important facet of his life: his undogmatic and yet profound religiosity and his philosophy of religion... religious sentiments and theological reflections played a role of much greater importance than any of his biographers seems to have realized. To prove this contention ... is one of the objectives of this monograph..."
Jammer begins by noting that although Einstein's parents "never renounced their Jewish heritage, they did not observe traditional rites or dietary laws and never attended religious services at the synagogue." (Pg. 15) Einstein told an interviewer, "As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene [i.e., Jesus]." (Pg. 22) Jammer adds, "As far as we know, Einstein never attended religious services and never prayed in a synagogue or at any other place of worship... Einstein's last wish was not to be buried in the Jewish tradition, but to be cremated and his ashes scattered." (Pg. 27)
Einstein said, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." (Pg. 31) He said to an inquirer, "behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in point of fact, religious." (Pg. 39-40) He told a rabbi who asked whether he believed in God, "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings." (Pg. 49)
In a 1930 essay printed in the New York Times (published as 'Einstein on Cosmic Religion and Other Opinions and Aphorisms'), "Einstein used... the term 'cosmic religious feeling' to describe the emotional state that one experiences when one recognizes the 'futility of human desires and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveals itself both in nature and in the world of thought.'" (Pg. 52) In a 1930 essay "What I Believe," he affirmed that "The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. Whoever does not know it and can no longer wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed... A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate... it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute true religiosity; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man. I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind we experience in ourselves." (Pg. 73)
In a 1940 article, he stated, "the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge." (Pg. 95) In rejecting the notion of a "personal" God, he added, "every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe---a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble." (Pg. 144)
This book, along with 'Einstein's God: Albert Einstein's Quest As a Scientist and As a Jew to Replace a Forsaken God,' is "essential reading" for anyone who wants to truly explore Einstein's thoughts about religion.
April 2, 2008
All of this book is well-researched and referenced. (It still doesn't seem to be as comprehensive as Phipp's book on Darwin.) I preferred the first two parts to the third -- the third discussed opinions on the connection between Einstein's theories and theology, which I found to be on the boring side.
Read
July 5, 2013The heavy read but very educational. Book I would re-read again and again.
Want to read
June 24, 2013Topic Jump: Atheism (Dawkins) - Einstein (Jammer)
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews