Did Einstein's God differ from Hawking's God?

[coffeesippin]

This could be fun .. hard to see how we can go off topic .. a lot less work for the recently overworked moderators if we remember to be polite and pleasant homo sapiens.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens

https://www.stmarys.ac.uk/news/2014/09/physics-beyond-god-play-dice-einstein-mean/

Albert Einstein is one of the greatest and certainly best known physicists. If you ask anyone to name a physicist the most common answer you will receive is “Einstein”. Einstein is also famous for his quotations. Among the many Einstein’s quotations one is particularly popular among the general public: “God does not play dice”. But what did Einstein mean by this?

"Not only does God play dice but... he sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen."  Hawking.

https://ronbc.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/hawkings-hidden-dice/

The scientific version of the debate concerns how much we can know about the state of the universe: whether we can measure, at least in principle, all that there is out there to be measured. In other words, can we ever know everything? Or will there always be surprises?

Einstein thought that we could, famously asserting that “God does not play dice.” Today’s most celebrated scientist, Stephen Hawking, co-author of the recent The Grand Design, has determined that not only was Einstein wrong, but that there’s even more uncertainty than previously thought.

1 minute ago, coffeesippin said:

   I forgot to touch the notification icon.  

 

Getting this started is giving me a hard time.  I can't seem to find the submit reply icon

Edited November 21, 2018 by coffeesippin
I forgot to touch the notification icon.

[Strange]

Quote

Stephen Hawking's Final Book Says There's 'No Possibility' of God in Our Universe

https://www.livescience.com/63854-stephen-hawking-says-no-god.html

So as Einstein had a concept of "god" (however abstract) and Hawking famously denied god, it is hard to see where to go from there...

[beecee]

Hawking of course was disagreeing with Einstein re his analogous statement, "god does not play dice" with reference of course to quantum theory.

Even the great Einstein was wrong on occasions, as was Hawking, both to their credit though were man enough and humble enough to admit to their errors of judgement/thought. 

I believe actually that both Hawking and Einstein believed in the concept of nature as analogous to any god......Neither  certainly did not accept any magical spaghetti monster up in the sky somewhere, ready to strike us down. 

Either way, whether this abstract Spinoza god, or just total rejection of the god myth, I don't see any real difference.

 

 

 

[coffeesippin]

44 minutes ago, Strange said:

https://www.livescience.com/63854-stephen-hawking-says-no-god.html

So as Einstein had a concept of "god" (however abstract) and Hawking famously denied god, it is hard to see where to go from there...

Hawking:  "Hawking did not rule out the existence of a Creator, asking in A Brief History of Time "Is the unified theory so compelling that it brings about its own existence?"^[138] In his early work, Hawking spoke of God in a metaphorical sense. In A Brief History of Time he wrote: "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God."^[139] In the same book he suggested that the existence of God was not necessary to explain the origin of the universe. Later discussions with Neil Turok led to the realisation that the existence of God was also compatible with an open universe."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking     

 

Einstein:   "He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",^[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,^[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."^[3] 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

"Your question is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist."

"Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.^[21]"

  

11 minutes ago, coffeesippin said:

Hawking:  "Hawking did not rule out the existence of a Creator, asking in A Brief History of Time "Is the unified theory so compelling that it brings about its own existence?"^[138] In his early work, Hawking spoke of God in a metaphorical sense. In A Brief History of Time he wrote: "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God."^[139] In the same book he suggested that the existence of God was not necessary to explain the origin of the universe. Later discussions with Neil Turok led to the realisation that the existence of God was also compatible with an open universe."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking     

 

Einstein:   "He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",^[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,^[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."^[3] 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

"Your question is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist."

"Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.^[21]"

  

Hawking:  “I believe the universe is governed by the laws of science,” he said. “The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws.”     

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2018/03/17/what-stephen-hawking-said-about-god-his-atheism-and-his-own-death.html

     As noted by Strange, Hawking's last book is said to include a statement 'There is no God.'  But we can't easily know his mind after that book, before the moment of his passing, because he was obviously conflicted throughout his life about God's existence.  

[swansont]

"God does not play dice" is a statement about quantum mechanics, not religion. As is the response. They are claims about how the universe behaves. In this exchange, God is a metaphor for the rules of nature, nothing  more.

[beecee]

28 minutes ago, swansont said:

"God does not play dice" is a statement about quantum mechanics, not religion. As is the response. They are claims about how the universe behaves. In this exchange, God is a metaphor for the rules of nature, nothing  more.

Bingo!that though won't stop certain people attempting to infer otherwise.

[coffeesippin]

3 hours ago, swansont said:

"God does not play dice" is a statement about quantum mechanics, not religion. As is the response. They are claims about how the universe behaves. In this exchange, God is a metaphor for the rules of nature, nothing  more.

Einstein:   "He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",^[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,^[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."^[3] 

"Your question is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist."

"Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.^[21]"

Hawking:  “I believe the universe is governed by the laws of science,” he said. “The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws.”         Einstein said he did not believe God intervened directly into man's daily life, (as the laws of nature do, my words.)  Those statements refer to much more than the rules of nature, how can the rules of nature intervene in themselves?

      From those statements it's easy to see that the idea of God was at work in their thinking in more than an abstract way.  Does quantum mechanics for instance have anything to do with the soul?  Both men had much exposure to faiths when young, Einstein's Jewish and Catholic, and Hawking Church of England.  Einstein became a strong Zionist.  Hawking's wife was strong in her Church of England faith, even singing in the church choir,  so Hawking could not have had strong objections to the idea of God in his home. 

      My statements above are repeats of what I wrote earlier in the topic.  Had they been read I doubt you would have been so quick to say either man's idea of God related only as if they were the universe at work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2018/03/17/what-stephen-hawking-said-about-god-his-atheism-and-his-own-death.html

3 hours ago, beecee said:

Bingo!that though won't stop certain people attempting to infer otherwise.

Einstein:   "He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",^[4] preferring to call himself an agnostic,^[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."^[3] 

"Your question is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist."

"Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.^[21]"

Hawking:  “I believe the universe is governed by the laws of science,” he said. “The laws may have been decreed by God, but God does not intervene to break the laws.”         Einstein said he did not believe God intervened directly into man's daily life, (as the laws of nature do, my words.)  Those statements refer to much more than the rules of nature, how can the rules of nature intervene in themselves?

      From those statements it's easy to see that the idea of God was at work in their thinking in more than an abstract way.  Does quantum mechanics for instance have anything to do with the soul?  Both men had much exposure to faiths when young, Einstein's Jewish and Catholic, and Hawking Church of England.  Einstein became a strong Zionist.  Hawking's wife was strong in her Church of England faith, even singing in the church choir,  so Hawking could not have had strong objections to the idea of God in his home. 

      My statements above are repeats of what I wrote earlier in the topic.  Had they been read I doubt you would have been so quick to say either man's idea of God related only as if they were the universe at work.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2018/03/17/what-stephen-hawking-said-about-god-his-atheism-and-his-own-death.html

Why was Hawking's funeral religious, and why was he buried in a religious institution?  If he was a staunch atheist surely those wishes would be to lie outside the religious bounday.  It may be easy during life to say, 'I don't believe in God.'   But isn't it comforting to be buried in Hallowed Ground?  Where his birth and death dates more than coincidences?

"Hawking was born on the 300th anniversary of Galileo's death and died on the 139th anniversary of Einstein's birth.^[330] His private funeral took place at 2 pm on the afternoon of 31 March 2018,^[331] at Great St Mary's Church, Cambridge.^[331][332]Guests at the funeral included Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones, and Queen guitarist and astrophysicist Brian May.^[333]Following the cremation, a service of thanksgiving was held at Westminster Abbey on 15 June 2018, after which his ashes were interred in the Abbey's nave, alongside the grave of Sir Isaac Newton and close to that of Charles Darwin.^[1][333][33"

[beecee]

You can check your history as much as you like...neither accepted your version of a god in the sky.  I don't call myself an atheist either...I accept the logic of the scientific method and where ever that leads.

[coffeesippin]

14 minutes ago, beecee said:

You can check your history as much as you like...neither accepted your version of a god in the sky.  I don't call myself an atheist either...I accept the logic of the scientific method and where ever that leads.

BeeCee, my worthy opponent .. why do you think anyone's idea of God should match MY idea of God?   Why should anyone's idea of science match YOUR idea of science?  We are almost 8,000,000,000 people on earth.  That's room for that number of ideas on anything.  Despite 10,000 people having the same idea about something, it still may be wrong.  I think it may have been you who in a post somewhere among the many admitted you learned 30 years ago that you don't know everything.  None of us know everything about everything.   

[beecee]

You are continually being obtuse. Where did I say I know everything....where did I say science knows everything?..I said by judgement is guided by the scientific method. Sheesh, no wonder you get into so much trouble!

[Eise]

coffeesippin, you should really distinguish between citations where 'God' is just a metaphor for nature, and where people really express their religious position. 

Einstein:

"the word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses."

"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly"

[Itoero]

7 hours ago, Eise said:

'God' is just a metaphor for nature

Isn't this basically Pantheism? Didn't Einstein 'believe' in the writings of Spinoza?

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by Itoero

[StringJunky]

7 hours ago, Eise said:

coffeesippin, you should really distinguish between citations where 'God' is just a metaphor for nature, and where people really express their religious position. 

Einstein:

"the word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses."

"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly"

The operative word is 'personal'. He believed God was in the nature of things... somewhat like a universe-sized organism. This is the god of Spinoza.

[mistermack]

4 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

The operative word is 'personal'. He believed God was in the nature of things... somewhat like a universe-sized organism. This is the god of Spinoza.

He was playing with words, that's all. In normal language, nearly nobody is going to call that concept god. "The Universe" would cover it for most people.

[StringJunky]

15 minutes ago, mistermack said:

He was playing with words, that's all. In normal language, nearly nobody is going to call that concept god. "The Universe" would cover it for most people.

I don't think so. He was religious but not in the "God has a white beard way". He didn''t anthropomorphize the concept, just like Spinoza didn't.

Edited November 22, 2018 by StringJunky

[mistermack]

8 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I don't think so. He was religious but not in the "God has a white beard way".

I think it's just a words thing. I'm amazed and awed by the Universe too. But I don't think I'm religious. Or even anywhere close to it. 

Einstein's version sounds more like flippant or whimsical superstition. Religion is generally the following of an organised belief, common to others and involving some sort of communal activities.

[StringJunky]

3 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I think it's just a words thing. I'm amazed and awed by the Universe too. But I don't think I'm religious. Or even anywhere close to it. 

Einstein's version sounds more like flippant or whimsical superstition. Religion is generally the following of an organised belief, common to others and involving some sort of communal activities.

Not everyone follows an organized doctrine but can still be religious. If I was religious, I would be like Einstein... but without the intelligence.

Edited November 22, 2018 by StringJunky

[mistermack]

4 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

If I was religious, I would be like Einstein... but without the intelligence.

I'd be like Hawking, but a bit more sedentary.

[Eise]

17 minutes ago, Itoero said:

Isn't this basically Pantheism? Didn't Einstein 'believe' in the writings of Spinoza?

If one just uses it as a metaphor, no. If one is serious, i.e.when he really think that nature and God are literally the same, then yes.

26 minutes ago, mistermack said:

He was playing with words, that's all. In normal language, nearly nobody is going to call that concept god. "The Universe" would cover it for most people.

If Einstein was very serious in his believe in the God of Spinoza, then this is not correct. The God of Spinoza has infinite attributes, but we only know two: the physical world and the mind. These are two different ways of looking at a 'part of God', e.g. a human. So 'the Universe', being all that is physical,  is only one attribute of God, there are many more.

[dimreepr]

12 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I think it's just a words thing. I'm amazed and awed by the Universe too. But I don't think I'm religious. Or even anywhere close to it. 

 

But you are biased...

[Eise]

13 minutes ago, mistermack said:

I think it's just a words thing. I'm amazed and awed by the Universe too. But I don't think I'm religious. Or even anywhere close to it. 

My answer to this: if the awe you feel for the universe contributes to a deeply felt, meaningful life to you, brings you to being at peace with life and death, including your ethics, then it is religious. Otherwise it is just another joyful experience. From what I've read from Einstein, he was religious in the first sense. So definitively not a word thing.

In 'God does not play dice' Einstein was just using 'God' as metaphor for nature. He could have said 'Every event has a perfectly defined cause'. Which is not as poetic.

[mistermack]

16 minutes ago, Eise said:

if the awe you feel for the universe contributes to a deeply felt, meaningful life to you, brings you to being at peace with life and death, including your ethics, then it is religious.

No it doesn't, and it's not, in my case. 

 

17 minutes ago, Eise said:

So definitively not a word thing.

It's exactly a word thing. If Einstein agreed with your wording, and agreed that he complied with it, then he would qualify as religious as mentioned in those words.

Other people would disagree that those words meant someone was religious. In other words, would disagree that that kind of feeling was a religious feeling. So it's about the word religion. And practically everyone has their own feeling for what it means. Some are more clearly defined than others, that's all. 

[StringJunky]

13 minutes ago, mistermack said:

No it doesn't, and it's not, in my case. 

 

It's exactly a word thing. If Einstein agreed with your wording, and agreed that he complied with it, then he would qualify as religious as mentioned in those words.

Other people would disagree that those words meant someone was religious. In other words, would disagree that that kind of feeling was a religious feeling. So it's about the word religion. And practically everyone has their own feeling for what it means. Some are more clearly defined than others, that's all. 

Plenty of Einstein quotes on this subject in this Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, mistermack said:

No it doesn't, and it's not, in my case.

Is your bias, somehow different? 

[mistermack]

11 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Is your bias, somehow different? 

My bias is towards things supported by what I see as good evidence. I'm happy to examine contrary evidence, and change my bias, if I find it convincing. That's nothing unique to me, but it's different to most indoctrinated people. 

18 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Plenty of Einstein quotes on this subject in this Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_and_philosophical_views_of_Albert_Einstein

To be honest, I think Einstein just didn't want the label atheist. And maybe it was a wise move, in his day. Maybe still is, if you don't want to get involved. Your wiki link says it all really in on sentence : 

"He clarified however that, "I am not an atheist",^[4]preferring to call himself an agnostic,^[5] or a "religious nonbeliever."^[