In the Words of Albert Einstein
Published on June 6, 2009 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Misc

In doing some research the other day I came upon the following passage written in the private journals of Albert Einstein sometime in the mid 1930's.  From what I've read this was written shortly before many like him left Europe before the onset of the war.  This emigration was known as the "brain drain."  He knew about the impending danger in Germany.  Take a listen to what he had to say back then.  I think you'll find it very informative especially in lieu of where we find ourselves now since he penned these words.  I emphasized a few comments that jumped out to me as I re-wrote his words.

"But even after mateiralism and mechanism have been more or less vanquished, the devastating influence of the twentieth-century secularism will still blight the spiritual experience of milions of unsuspecting souls.

"Modern secularism has been fostered by two world-wide influences.  The Father of secularism was the narrow minded and godless attitude of nineteenth and twentieth-century so called science-atheistic science.  The mother of modern secularism was the totalitarian medieval Christian church.  Secularism had its inception as a rising protest against the almost complete domination of Western civilization by the institutionalized Christian church. 

"In this present day (1930s), the prevailing intellectual and philosophical climate of both European and American life is decidedly secular-humanistic.  For three hundred years Western thinking has been progressively secularized.  Religion has become more and more a nominal influence, largely a ritualistic exercise.  The majority of professed Christians of Western civilization are unwittingly actual secularists.

"It required a great power, a mighty influence, to free the thinking and living of the Western peoples from the withering grasp of a totalitarian ecclessiastical domination.  Secularism did break the bonds of church control, and now in turn it threatens to establish a new and godless type of mastery over the hearts and minds of modern man.  The tryrannical and dictatorial political state is the direct offspring of scientific materialism and philosophic secularism.  Secularism no sooner frees mankind from the domination of the institutionalized church than it sells us into slavish bondage to the totalitarian state.  Secularism frees mankind from ecclesiastical slavery only to betrray us into the tyranny of political and economic slavery.

"Materialism denies God, secularism simply ignores him; at least that was the earlier attitude.  More recently, secularism has assumed a more militant attitude, assuming to take the place of the religion whose totalitarian bondage it onetime resisted.  Twentieth-century secularism tends to affirm that mankind does not need God.  But beware!  This godless philosophy of human society will lead only to unrest, animosity, unhappiness, war, and worldwide diseaster.

"Secularism can never bring peace to mankind.  Nothing can take the place of God in human society.  Nonetheless, we should not be quick to surrender the beneficient gains of the secular revolt from ecclesiastical totalitarianism.  Western civilization today enjoys many liberties and satisfactions as a result of the secular revolt.  The great mistake of secularism was this:  In revolting against the almost total control of life by religious authority and after attaining the liberation from such ecclesiastical tyranny, the secularists went on to institute a revolt against God himself, sometimes tacitly and sometimes openly.

"To the secularistic revolt we owe the amazing creativity of American industrialism and the unprecedented material progress of Western civilization.  And because the secularistic revolt went too far and lost sight of God and true religion, there also followed the unlooked-for harvest of world wars and international unsettledness.

"It is not necessary to sacrifice faith in God in order to enjoy the blessings of the modern secularistic revolt: tolerance, social service, democratic government, and civil liberties.  It was not necessary for the secularists to antagonize true religion in order to promote science and advance education

Without God, without religion, scientific secularism can never co-ordinate its forces, harmonize its divergent and rivalrous interests, races, and nationalisms.  This secularistic human society, notwithstanding its unparalleled materialistic achievement, is slowly disintegrating.  The chief cohesive force resisting this disintegration of antagonism is nationalism.  And nationalism is the chief barrier to world peace.

"The inherent weakness of secularism is that it discards ethics and religion for politics and power.  You simply cannot establish the brotherhood of mankind while ignoring or denying the fatherhood of God.

"Secular social and political optimism is an illusion.  Without God, neither freedom and liberty, nor property and wealth will lead to peace.

"The complete secularization of science, education, industry, and society can lead only to disaster.  During the first third of the twentieth century we have killed more human beings than were killed during the whole of the Christian era.  And this is only the beginning of the dire harvest of materialism and secularism; still more terrible destruction is yet to come."

 


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 15, 2009

So are you not getting the whole "physicist commenting on religion" thing? No matter which way you lean on the subject, you can't rightly say "Well Einstein said this, therefore (blank)". And given that I brought the fallacy to the attention of KFCs mistaken quoting of Einstein, specifically to further her religious beliefs, well, what more needs to be said?

on Jun 15, 2009

Also did you seriously just argue that two wrongs make a right (in that because other, nonrelated people killed christians, they were just in killing hypatia) and that because some individuals works didn't all survive, others wouldn't either? Do you realize how many writings we still have that are far older than Shakespeare's works? The Republic? The Odyssey? Particularly when, as a follower of Platonism, Hypatia's works were primarily mathematic?

And did you honestly just argue that science has no room for geometric theory? It's a field of mathematics. Can you not grasp that mathematicians also formulate theorems?

on Jun 15, 2009

My point WASN'T that Shakespeare was so old it was the fact of how RECENT it was and that WE ARE MISSING a fair amount of his works even though during his OWN time he was famous.

Did you just bring up Homer's writings? Do you know how much of Homer's writings we are missing? Just because we have the odyssey DOESN'T mean let's throw a party!

Did I say that science has no room for geometry? Let's see here:

the_Peoples_Party


Finally not everything can be subjected to the scientific method.  An example is geometry (aka Mathematical Theory), much of science relies on cogitation (or in other words being able to think things through ones own brain) which is a foundation of science and not observation in order to prove something.  If you think about it basing geometrical law on measurement or observation is NO GOOD!


 

And did you honestly just argue that science has no room for geometric theory? It's a field of mathematics. Can you not grasp that mathematicians also formulate theorems?[/quote]

I haven't seen where I stated that science has no room in the manager for geometry to lays its head.

Ummmm really? Did you just bring up something that has no meaning to the current discourse? You want to be a part of the conversation FINE! Prove any of them with the Scientific Method go observe them (I'll even give you an example Banach fixed point theorem.  Hey ITS A FIXED POINT SO THAT SHOULD BE REAL EASY TO OBSERVE).  GO observe a hyperbolic Go observe the Law of sines. Maybe you'll see a linear nonhomogeneous differential equation out in the rain forest? Or Do you observe those out in the ocean floating along side the non-euclidean?

Nephilim_X
Also did you seriously just argue that two wrongs make a right

Since considering you said that WE ARE SO SUPERIOR that during no other time in history we have in place the scientific method in full use:

Nephilim_X
If there is an argument of superiority, it is that we are now in a time and place where the scientific method is fully in use and respected.

Prove to me with the scientific method that what they (

Nephilim_X
Also did you seriously just argue that two wrongs make a right
) did was wrong?

Because obviously Stalin thought what he was doing was right.  Caesar killing all those barbarians thought he was right.  He killed Christians and Jews as well. Obviously the people that obeyed their orders didn't put up enough stink to prevent mass killings of people so they were in some what agreement as well.

Again show me with the scientific method that their actions are wrong.  Please.............

on Jun 15, 2009

Oh yeah Einstein did make comments about G-D but G-D is not just contained to RELIGION.  He was coming at G-D with physicst view not a religious view.

on Jun 15, 2009

Hahaha wait you're actually trying to apply a method for discerning the way the universe functions to morality. You may as well ask that I use string theory to prove the morality of capitalism. It's two different things. No worries; I guess you're easily confused between the humanist view of things and mere application of scientific method. But even then, I'm unsure how you aren't getting it.

It's almost as if humanism is focused on human rights and thus would outright condemn Stalin, Hitler and Caesar, or anyone else who would violate such rights!

Edit: Anyway, consider this my last reply to you until you can manage to properly format a response, because I'm not wasting my time with an unreadable mess. Also, as far as scientific method as applied to the intangible goes, you do realize we do this all the time and have been doing it for some time, right?

on Jun 24, 2009

Oh my...all this serious talk.  Everyone missed the funniest part of this article.

 

worldwide diseaster.

 

Eat your heart out, Freud.

2 Pages1 2