Did Albert Einstein Believe In God?
By Jon Therkildsen, MSc & MBA from University of Århus (2004)
Was Albert Einstein Religious?
By all accounts, no. He did not believe in the Abrahamic God nor any other omnipotent supramundane entity. He did not belong to a congregation or practice any rituals or participate in prayers. He was a man of science, a disciple of evidence.
Not long before Einstein’s death, Einstein wrote his friend, Dr. Eric Gutkind, a private letter in which he candidly expressed his religious views in a very straightforward manner. The letter famously dubbed “Einstein’s god letter” (written 1954, publicized 2008):
When you read it, it is evident that he is as close to being an atheist, late in his life, as one can get without outright declaring it. He himself said publically a few times that he was agnostic, and then later a “religious nonbeliever” (however that works). Neither classifications, though, are in support of a “believe in a God(s)” or an “omnipotent creator.” Agnosticism means “without knowledge/evidence,” which refers to whatever is or is not, must be evidence-based.
From the “God letter,” he, as one example, shared his view like this:
”... The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses…[…]… religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstition...”
- a pretty apt statement?
That said, in his talks with Rabbi Herbert Goldstein, much earlier in his life, we get this famous line;
”... I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind...”
In that talk, Einstein distanced himself from the conventional view on God and voiced a more respectful spin, but read the full conversation, and he is talking about epistemological science and not so much a belief-system. Baruch Spinoza’s philosophy included a strong sense of determinism, which resonated deeply with Einstein’s view on the world, and his scientific work. This further translates into his stance against the probabilistic nature of Quantum Mechanics. The view, though, was scientific and not sectarian. Einstein remained a supporter of determinism until his death.
Indeed, he often expressed that he didn’t like militaristic atheists and their rigid ways, even more so than dogmatic religionists. However, he specified on many occasions that his abhorrence is of the doctrinated refusal of possibility rather than an outright stance on worldviews. He wasn’t against atheism; he was opposing any view that hinders learning. And he wasn’t against religions either, for as he said:
“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
He had a beautiful mind and remained open to the possible, but make no mistake about it: he was a man of science and took the virtues of observations and data above everything else.
I think he probably - like most of us - was ambiguous and adjusted viewpoints throughout his life and was sometimes more political than earnest in his many statements. When getting inside his head, his talks must be scrutinized and understood under which setting and agenda they were conducted. Like it or not, religion is a hot topic, and it is not always favorable to preach - if against it or for it. He was known to avoid the subject at lectures, but, if pressured enough, it is said he would quickly and quietly express that he did not believe in a God.
That said, his ”god letter” is his private unfiltered views straight from the horse’s mouth, and it is refreshingly straightforward.
If we should label him anything, I would label him a diehard man of science. An agnostic - not refusing the possibility of deities, but surely not entertaining their certitude either.
Now, finally, we have this famous quote too, which is probably the source of much of the confusion:
”... God does not play dice with the universe.”
To read this quote in the right light, we must revisit the whole conversation (exchange of several letters between him and quantum physicist Max Born). And when we do that, it is apparent that he is using it as a metaphor for the natural structures of the world and not a reflection on an omnipotent presence. In truth, it was a scientific discussion with Born, not an exchange of ideas on belief-systems. They debated the conflicts between the two major scientific paradigms in physics - Classical Mechanics and Quantum Mechanics; one relies on deterministic structures, the other on stochastic properties (aka “dice throwing”). Nature does not play dice - was his point, but where is the panache in that?
Also, know; Einstein later touched on what he meant by this very quote about dice and god, This is what he said:
”... Of course, it was a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is 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...”
Look at the evidence, as our friend Albert might have said, and there can be little if any doubt about his private weltanschauung.
In some of his own words throughout his public life:
”… I came — through the child of entirely irreligious parents — to a deep religiousness, which, however, reached an abrupt end at the age of twelve. Through the reading of popular scientific books, I soon reached the conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true.”
“… You [Max Born] believe in a God who plays dice, and I in complete law and order in a world which objectively exists, and which I in a wildly speculative way, am trying to capture. I firmly believe, but I hope that someone will discover a more realistic way, or rather a more tangible basis than it has been my lot to find. Even the great initial success of the quantum theory does not make me believe in the fundamental dice game, although I am well aware that some of our younger colleagues interpret this as a consequence of senility.”
“My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment.”
“… and the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mindset I have a deep affinity, have no different quality for me than other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better at anything than other human groups, though at least a lack of power keeps them from the worst excesses. Thus I can ascertain nothing “Chosen” about them.”
”… The word God is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses …"
"… The Bible a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends… [..]… No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can [for me] change anything about this…"
"… It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously..."
”… For me,…[..]… all religion is an incarnation of the most childish superstition...”
"… The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naïve..."