The Big Scientists’ View of Religion: A Heap of Quotations
Einstein:
You will have a hard time finding among scientists of deep attainment anyone who does not have his own religious feeling.
— “The Religious Spirit of Science,” in The Collected Works of Einstein, vol. 1, p. 67
A person inspired by religion has already, to the greatest possible extent, freed himself from the shackles of selfish desire, and is wholly devoted to thoughts, feelings, and aspirations that possess transpersonal value and which he holds fast to. What I consider important is the power of this content that transcends the individual, and the depth of the belief in its far-reaching significance that goes beyond all else, not whether one has ever tried to link that content to a divine being.
— Collected Works from Einstein’s Later Years, Fang Zaiqing, Han Wenbo, He Weiguo / trans., Hainan Publishing House, 2000, p. 27
Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.
— Collected Works from Einstein’s Later Years, Fang Zaiqing, Han Wenbo, He Weiguo / trans., Hainan Publishing House, 2000, p. 28
Feynman:
We know that even with definite moral values, human beings are still very fragile; in order to keep them from betraying their conscience, one must constantly remind them of the value of morality. It is not as simple as whether you have a correct conscience or not; there is another question here, namely whether you can retain the strength to do what you know is right. We need religion to give us strength, to give us comfort, to encourage us to follow these moral views. This is religion’s uplifting side: it encourages people not only in moral conduct, but also in art and in all kinds of great ideas and actions.
— Feynman, The Pleasure of Finding Things Out, trans. Zhang Yuhu, Hunan Science & Technology Press, 2005, p. 261
Heisenberg:
Although I am firmly convinced that scientific truth within its own domain is beyond doubt, I can by no means exclude the content of religious thought, nor can I regard it as merely a stage of human consciousness that we once passed through and that we shall be able to discard in the future.
— Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, The Commercial Press, 1984, p. 160
If there were no examples to show us the way, we would lose the scale by which to measure values (ethical standards), and with that we would also lose the meaning of our actions and of enduring suffering; the final result could only be negation and disappointment. So religion is the foundation of ethics, and ethics is the precondition of life.
— Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, The Commercial Press, 1984, p. 165
— Cited from Wu Guosheng, ed., Reader on Science for Universities, Guangxi Normal University Press, 2004, pp. 247–255
Planck:
When one inquires into the existence and essence of a supreme power that governs the world, religion and natural science come together. The answers they each give are at least in some respects comparable. As we can see, they are not only not contradictory, but also in harmony with one another; second, both sides acknowledge that the essence of this world order can never be directly known, but only indirectly known, or rather only surmised. For this reason, religion must make use of its distinctive symbols, while exact natural science uses measurement based on sensation. So nothing can prevent us from identifying these two omnipresent, powerfully effective, and mysterious forces with one another: the world order of natural science and the God of religion.
— M. Planck, Religion and Naturwissenschaft, 1958, pp. 26–27
— Cited separately by Heisenberg and Planck, in Qian Shiti: Science and Religion—Their Relation and Historical Evolution, People’s Publishing House, 2002, pp. 157 and 158
Bohr:
Here, science and religion take fundamentally different points of departure; the aim of science is to develop a universal method for organizing ordinary human experience; the root of religion, by contrast, lies in that effort within society to promote harmony among views and conduct. … (omitted discussion of the rift between science and religion since the mechanical view of nature) …
However, the development of modern science has stressed the necessity of paying proper attention to drawing the line of demarcation between subject and object for the sake of unambiguous communication of thought; in this way, it has created a new basis for the application of words such as knowledge and belief. …
— Bohr, Selected Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr, trans. Ge Ge, The Commercial Press, 1999, p. 196
Bohm:
… If one is to understand the meaning that general scientific knowledge has for one’s own concrete problems, and if one is to carry out the scientific spirit of looking at the self as it is, without being constrained by one’s own likes and dislikes, then this artistic spirit is very important and can also help resolve conflicts.
However, if people do not simultaneously possess the spirit of facing life in its wholeness and completeness, then such an approach is impossible; we still need a religious spirit, but no longer need religious myths, …
— Bohm, On Creativity, trans. Hong Dingguo, Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers, 2001, p. 34
Poincaré:
Scientists do not study nature because nature is useful; they study it because they like it, and they like it because it is beautiful. If nature were not beautiful, it would not be worth knowing; if nature were not worth knowing, life would not be worth living.
— Cited in What Is Scientific Truth, p. 227
Even if it has already been proved that God is all-powerful and can crush us; even if it can be proved that God is helpful and that we ought to be grateful to God, this still cannot prove that we must obey God. Some people regard as obnoxious the right that is the most precious of all freedoms. Yet if we love God, all proof becomes unnecessary; obedience may then be entirely natural. That is why religion is powerful, whereas metaphysical systems are not.
— Poincaré, The Last Thoughts, p. 104, Chinese translation p. 119
What we must worry about is only that incomplete science, erroneous science, science that seduces us with its hollow appearance and incites us to destroy things that should not be destroyed, only for us to realize, when we know more, that what has been destroyed will still need to be rebuilt later, but by then it is already too late. Some people are captivated by an idea not because it is correct, but because it is new, because it is fashionable. These people are dreadful destroyers, but they are not … I was just about to say that they are not scientists, but I notice that many of them have made tremendous contributions to science; therefore they are scientists, and they are scientists not because of this, but independently of it.
True science worries about hasty generalization, and worries about hasty theoretical deduction. … Undoubtedly, we must criticize tradition, but we must certainly not abandon tradition altogether.
— Poincaré, The Last Thoughts, p. 110, Chinese translation p. 127
Schrödinger:
What is the value of natural science? I would answer: its sphere of influence, aims, and value are equally important to the other branches of human knowledge. More than that, it only makes sense to discuss its scope or value with reference to the unified whole formed by them, not any single branch.
— Schrödinger, Nature and the Greeks, trans. Yan Feng, Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers, 2002, p. 96
I was born into such a predicament—without knowing where I came from, where I am going, or even who I am. This is my situation, and yours too, and that of each and every one of you. Every person is in this predicament, and always will be. This reality cannot give me any answer. We eagerly want to know where we came from and where we are going, but the only thing observable is the environment in which we find ourselves. That is why we are so urgently striving with all our might to seek answers. This is science, scholarship, and knowledge; this is the true source of all human spiritual pursuits.”
— Schrödinger, Nature and the Greeks, trans. Yan Feng, Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers, 2002, pp. 96–97
— Note by the translator: Here Schrödinger does not explicitly speak about religion, but he clearly expresses the view that science alone is insufficient, as well as the quasi-religious passion of scientific inquiry. In addition, in the second part, chapter 5, “Science and Religion,” of Schrödinger’s famous book What Is Life?, on the theme of “consciousness and matter,” Schrödinger mainly discusses Plato, Kant, and Einstein; the basic view remains the same: science cannot solve everything.
Born:
From the very beginning I felt that research work was a great delight, and even today it remains a pleasure. … Perhaps, except for art, it is even more enjoyable than creative work in other professions. The pleasure lies in sensing the mysteries of nature, discovering the secret of creation, and bringing some sense and order to a certain part of this chaotic world; it is a philosophical delight.
— Born, “Science and Philosophy,” in Wu Guosheng, ed., Reader on Science for Universities, p. 220
Dirac:
When Dirac first went to Copenhagen, he emotionally told his colleagues: “There is no sense in the poor suffering, and no meaning in the rich getting wealth. Organized religion is nothing but a ridiculous fraud.” It is said that after hearing these remarks, Pauli said: “Dirac has a new religion—one without God, and Dirac is its prophet.” That is our Dirac: a Dirac who pursues not only truth and beauty, but also “the good.”
— Feynman and Weinberg, From Antiparticles to the Final Law, trans. Li Peilian, Hunan Science & Technology Press, 2003, p. 93
— Note by the translator: Dirac can probably be counted as the most “pure” among modern great physicists; he had no interest in philosophy[①]. Yet at the same time, he was the scientist whose pursuit of natural “beauty” was most unwavering; his “scientific religious obsession” could in fact be said to have been the most fanatical.
[①]At the same time, Dirac also had no interest in literature or music, in contrast to Schrödinger, who was well read in classical literature; Einstein, who played the violin; the science prankster Feynman, who played in a samba band; and Planck, Sommerfeld, Heisenberg, Born, and others, who were all skilled at the piano. In fact, for Dirac, scientific inquiry concentrated all his pursuits of truth, goodness, and beauty; for him, science was at once religion and art.
Translated from the Chinese original with AI assistance. The original text is authoritative.
Leave a Reply