More general, less relativity
Last night I was listening to a radio program I'd never heard before. It's called Speaking of Faith and it is distributed by American Public Media. The broadcast was entitled Einstein's God and focused on his thoughts on religion and science (links to podcasts here). There were a number of fascinating segments, from his take on time and that whole relativity thang to his feelings about various classical music composers.
One of the most striking things I found was this excerpt from The World As I See It:
The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. He who knows it not and can no longer wonder, no longer feel amazement, is as good as dead, a snuffed-out candle. It was the experience of mystery—even if mixed with fear—that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms—it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; 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 type of which we are conscious in ourselves. An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension, nor do I wish it otherwise; such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls. Enough for me is the mystery of eternity of life, and the inkling of the marvelous structure of reality, together with the single-hearted endeavor to comprehend a portion, be it never so tiny, of the reason that manifests itself in nature.
That passage really resonates with me and I can't seem to find the words to share my appreciation for it. I like this idea of religion as a kind of mysterious realm that envelopes art and science, which is such a departure from what I tend to think of when people talk about "religion" today. It's comforting that a man as brilliant as he was, found himself humbled by these things and accepting that some things are beyond comprehension.
One of the guests, Paul Davies, a theoretical physicist/cosmologist/bioastronomer (just image that business card), observed that "he did have, I think, a genuine cosmic religious feeling, a sense of admiration at the intellectual ingenuity of the universe. Not just its majesty, but its extraordinary subtlety and beauty and mathematical elegance."
And yet we should not grieve for those who have gone from us in the primes of their lives after happy and fruitful years of activity, and who have been privileged to accomplish in full measure their task in life.
Something there is that can refresh and revivify older people: joy in the activities of the younger generation—a joy, to be sure, that is clouded by dark forebodings in these unsettled times. And yet, as always, the springtime sun brings forth new life, and we may rejoice because of this new life and contribute to its unfolding; and Mozart remains as beautiful and tender as he always was and always will be. There is, after all, something eternal that lies beyond reach of the hand of fate and of all human delusions. And such eternals lie closer to an older person than to a younger one oscillating between fear and hope. For us, there remains the privilege of experiencing beauty and truth in their purest form.
I'm not quite sure what to make of that (particularly the latter part). Maybe because I don't consider myself "an older person" (yet), I don't understand? I like the sound of "something eternal that lies beyond reach of the hand of fate and of all human delusions." There is something that makes me smile about the mention of the beauty of Mozart being timeless too.
[On second thought, I'm going to add this to The Academy of Fine Ideas group. Let me know if this post isn't up to par for it and I'll remove it, but I thought it might be appropriate for that group.]
Comments
Einstein does not seem to have ever considered the origins of our conscious sensations even though the sense of the mysterious is a conscious sensation probabably derived from a mix of the fear emotion and the curiosity motivation. Because conscious sensations are not affected by physical forces they do not seem to have existed in his mechanistic world view. (Yet there are ways to include conscious sensations into physics now that do not require forces).
Einstein does seem to have considered later in life that the creation of the universe implies that something eternal out of which the universe sprang must exist somewhere, somehow. Still, I agree with him that the old style religions just have too much supersitious baggage to be taken seriously.
You often hear a lot about Einstein the Mathematician, Einstein the Physicist, etcetera. There are things he had only grasped the basics of, that have since gone above and beyond. One such is the work being done by scientists from the NEC Research Institute in Princeton, N.J., and their work with faster than light streams. However, what you rarely hear of is his insight into theology.
Some of the ideas conjured up are similar to the movie, "The Matrix". What if instead of being physical beings trapped within an electric/electronic confine as in the movie, we are instead electrical beings trapped into this physical world. The energey part of us being what is referred to as our Auia, or Soul. When taken into context of what God "is", he would then become the energy source behind everything. Therefore omnipresent, omnipotent and it nicely explains how he is "just there" at all times.
I always wondered what would be the outcome of a theological discussion between Tesla and Einstein. It would have been interesting to hear how two of the greatest minds in our history would have expounded upon the subject. I think they would both agree that without some greater power to aspire to, man would indeed have spent many a day wallowing in the darkness.
They probably would have said that religion should definitely exist without all the superstition, elongated ceremonies and theatrics involved in most religions today. Pure belief for belief's sake.
Who of us is so cold that we can imagine feeling nothing if not joy at the passing of our loved ones? That life is cyclical doesn't take away our true emotions. I can't comprehend having none. To each his own. Maybe I'm just not a bright enough menace to the world to understand the gravity of my words?
Also, I'm not sure I can be religious. I struggle far too much with here and now. Unfathomable beyonds are, well, beyond me. I wish only to live for today, learning and experiencing all that life offers to me and all that fulfills my curiosity. Sometimes just existing. That's enough for me. I believe what matters is that whatever conclusion we come to on an individual basis, that we find comfort in it or feel content with it.