Newsgroup: it.scienza.biologia
Titolo: Il Rifiuto della Scienza atea

Il convertito Flew replica a dawkins
Scienza «atea»? No, grazie
L'illusione di Dio dello scrittore ateo Richard Dawkins č al primo posto 
delle classifiche avendo raggiunto il record di oltre un milione di copie 
vendute. Ma č ancora piů rimarchevole rispetto a tale conquista economica il 
fatto che i contenuti - o piuttosto, la mancanza di contenuti - di questo 
libro mostrino come Dawkins stesso sia diventato quello che lui e i suoi 
seguaci "laici" credono sia praticamente impossibile: diventare un laico 
bigotto. (La mia copia dell'Oxford Dictionary definisce un bigotto «colui 
che aderisce in maniera ostinata ed intollerante ad un certo punto di 
vista»).
L'errore di Dawkins come docente universitario (lo era ancora durante il 
periodo in cui ha composto quel libro sebbene abbia poi annunciato l'intenzione 
di ritirarsi) č stato il suo scandaloso e apparentante deliberato rifiuto di 
presentare la dottrina che pare abbia rifiutato nel modo piů deciso. 
Troviamo nell'indice del suo libro cinque riferimenti ad Einstein. 
Riguardano la maschera di Einstein e la posizione di Einstein sulla 
moralitŕ; su un Dio personale; sullo scopo della vita (sulla situazione 
umana e su come l'uomo si comporti per amore di un altro uomo e soprattutto 
per coloro dal cui benessere dipende la nostra stessa felicitŕ); e, infine, 
la visione religiosa di Einstein.
Ma (trovo difficile scrivere con ritegno riguardo questo rifiuto 
oscurantista di Dawkins) non cita il riferimento piů importante riguardo 
Einstein: ovvero, che la complessitŕ integrata del mondo della fisica lo ha 
condotto a credere che ci deve essere un'Intelligenza Divina dietro ad essa. 
(Io stesso penso che sia ovvio il fatto che se questo argomento č 
applicabile al mondo della fisica, allora debba essere enormemente piů 
potente se applicato al mondo della biologia, incommensurabilmente molto piů 
complicato). Di certo molti fisici di altissima reputazione non concordano 
con Einstein su questo argomento. Ma un attacco accademico contro una certa 
posizione ideologica che si presume errata deve di certo criticare tale 
posizione nella sua forma piů compiuta.
Questo č ciň che Dawkins non fa nel caso di Einstein; il suo errore č l'indizio 
decisivo della insinceritŕ del suo intento accademico e perciň mi mette sull'attenti 
riguardo al suo essere diventato un laico bigotto, cosa che lui 
probabilmente considerava impossibile. A pagina 372 de L'illusione di Dio vi 
č una nota significativa. Vi si legge: «Forse stiamo assistendo a qualcosa 
di analogo oggi, nel caso dello strombazzatissimo voltafaccia del filosofo 
Antony Flew, che da vecchio ha annunciato di essersi convertito alla fede in 
una qualche divinitŕ (il tam tam su internet č stato notevole quando si č 
saputa la notizia)». Quello che č importante riguardo a questo passo non č 
quello che Dawkins sta dicendo di Flew ma quello che qui sta mostrando di 
Dawkins. Perché se ha avuto un qualche interesse nella veritŕ della 
questione di cui si stava occupando cosě tanto, avrebbe sicuramente dovuto 
scrivermi una richiesta di chiarimento. (Dopo un resoconto della mia 
conversione al Deismo, ricevetti un torrente di domande, pubblicate sul 
bollettino del Royal Institute of Philosophy; cercai di rispondere a 
ciascuna lettera). Tutto questo affare mostra molto chiaramente che Dawkins 
non č interessato alla veritŕ in quanto tale ma ha anzitutto come primo 
interesse screditare il proprio avversario ideologico con qualsiasi 
strumento.
Ciň costituirebbe una ragione sufficiente per sospettare che l'intera 
faccenda di L'illusione di Dio non era, come invece pretendeva di essere, un 
tentativo di scoprire e diffondere la conoscenza dell'esistenza o non 
esistenza di Dio, quanto piuttosto un tentativo - di estremo successo - di 
diffondere le convinzioni personali dell'autore. Un punto meno importante 
che va sottolineato č che sebbene l'indice di L'illusione di Dio" annoti sei 
riferimenti al Deismo, non propone nessuna definizione della parola 
"Deismo". Questo mette Dawkins nelle condizioni di suggerire l'idea che i 
Deisti sono un misto di credenti in questo e quello. La veritŕ, che Dawkins 
ha cercato di apprendere prima che questo libro andasse in stampa, č che i 
Deisti credono nell'esistenza di un Dio ma non nel Dio di una qualche 
rivelazione. Infatti, la prima comparsa pubblica di rilievo della nozione di 
Deismo fu nella Rivoluzione americana. Il giovane che vergň la Dichiarazione 
di Indipendenza e che piů tardi sarebbe diventato il presidente Jefferson 
era un Deista, come lo erano diversi altri padri fondatori di quell'importante 
istituzione che oggi continua a vivere, gli Stati Uniti.
In questa nota mostruosa di ciň che sono propenso a descrivere come un 
"libro-mostro" - L'illusione di Dio - Dawkins mi rimprovera per quella che 
definisce una «vergognosa decisione» di accettare, nel 2006, il Philip E. 
Johnson Award for Liberty and Truth. L'istituto che promuove questo libro č 
il Biola (The Bible Institute of Los Angeles). Dawkins non dice chiaramente 
che la sua obiezione alla mia decisione consiste nel fatto che il Biola č 
specificatamene un'istituzione cristiana. Dŕ per scontato (ma si rifiuta 
dall'affermarlo apertamente) che ciň č incompatibile con la produzione di 
lavori accademici di alta qualitŕ in qualsivoglia dipartimento, una tesi, 
questa, che non sarebbe accettata nella mia universitŕ, e nemmeno a Oxford o 
a Harvard. 

Il problema, da un punto di vista
dello sviluppo preistorico-storico del pensiero,
parte dal cercare di capire l'uomo.
Ossia e' avvenuto che grandi filosofi antichi
- avevano previsto con metodo discorsivo-logico l'esistenza dell'atomo
 ma non avevano mezzi per provarla con metodo scientifico,
- avevano previsto che la Terra e' rotonda, la misura della circonferenza
  che il Sole era molto piu lontano della Luna, e percio' doveva
  essere la Terra che ruotava attorno al Sole
ma erano senpre ragionamenti, - non esistevano prove.
Anche riguardo all'UOMO, avevano avuto intuizioni
ossia che l'uomo non e' solo materia, (hardware)
ma deve avere anche un software (anima).
Questa affermazione non e' stata verificata,
tutti gli studi su particelle, dna, ecc... sono sempre analisi
rivolte all'hardware dei viventi. Ma la scienza e' ben lontana
dall'intraprendere uno serio studio dell'Energia.
Forse ancora non ne ha i mezzi,
per un preconcetto abbandono dell'argomento.
Ma qualunque dichiarazione di qualunque scienziato,
non potra' cancellare nei singoli la sensazione di non essere
solo "materia", ma di avere una energia che rende vitale
la materia stessa.
Credo che la supposisizione dell'esistenza di Dio,
anche se non la credo probabile, sia partita da queste considerazioni
 

 condotto a credere che ci deve essere un'Intelligenza Divina dietro ad essa.
Quantuque non vi sia dubbio (IMHO) che il libro di Dawkins sia
un'operazione esclusivamente commerciale e sia da considerarsi un libro
d'attualità nell'ambito dei fermenti culturali che pervasero l'europa e
l'america di inizio '800 (cioè un paio di secoli fa), tuttavia Flew riesce
con facilità a mostrarsi ancora più cialtrone dell'autore che critica.
Come si può desumere dalla nutrita lista di citazioni autografe di
Einstein che riporto di seguito, egli non fu mai un deista nel senso che
dice Flew (che sembra invece credere in un Dio personale, anche se non in
quelli propagandati dalle religioni tradizionali), il quale del resto non
porta neppure uno straccio di citazione a sostegno.
In una celebre citazione Einstein afferma di credere al Dio di Spinoza,
che però non è un Dio personale, ma piuttosto la razionalità immanente al
mondo naturale così come ci si presenta (Deus sive natura). 
Senza considerare che (con tutto il rispetto e l'ammirazione che Einstein
merita come uomo di scienza) i due cialtronacci (Flew e Dawkins)
dovrebbero avere chiaro in mente che il pensiero di Einstein sulla
religione non costituisce un argomento a favore o contro questa o quella
visione 
ateo-agnostico-materialistica / clerico-religiosa della realtà.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“It was, of course, 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.”
Albert Einstein, in a letter March 24, 1954; from Albert Einstein the
Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 43.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“When I was a fairly precocious young man I became thoroughly impressed
with the futility of the hopes and strivings that chase most men
restlessly through life. Moreover, I soon discovered the cruelty of that
chase, which in those years was much more carefully covered up by
hypocrisy and glittering words than is the case today. By the mere
existence of his stomach everyone was condemned to participate in that
chase. The stomach might well be satisfied by such participation, but not
man insofar as he is a thinking and feeling being.
“As the first way out there was religion, which is implanted into every
child by way of the traditional education-machine. Thus I came — though
the child of entirely irreligious (Jewish) 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. The
consequence was a positively fanatic orgy of freethinking coupled with the
impression that youth is intentionally being deceived by the state through
lies; it was a crushing impression. Mistrust of every kind of authority
grew out of this experience, a skeptical attitude toward the convictions
that were alive in any specific social environment-an attitude that has
never again left me, even though, later on, it has been tempered by a
better insight into the causal connections. It is quite clear to me that
the religious paradise of youth, which was thus lost, was a first attempt
to free myself from the chains of the ‘merely personal,’ from an existence
dominated by wishes, hopes, and primitive feelings. Out yonder there was
this huge world, which exists independently of us human beings and which
stands before us like a great, eternal riddle, at least partially
accessible to our inspection and thinking. The contemplation of this world
beckoned as a liberation, and I soon noticed that many a man whom I had
learned to esteem and to admire had found inner freedom and security in
its pursuit. The mental grasp of this extra-personal world within the
frame of our capabilities presented itself to my mind, half consciously,
half unconsciously, as a supreme goal. Similarly motivated men of the
present and of the past, as well as the insights they had achieved, were
the friends who could not be lost. The road to this paradise was not as
comfortable and alluring as the road to the religious paradise; but it has
shown itself reliable, and I have never regretted having chosen it.”
Albert Einstein, Autobiographical Notes, Chicago, Illinois: Open Court
Publishing Company, 1979, pp 3-5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a
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.”
Albert Einstein in a letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950; Einstein
Archive 59-215; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded Quotable Einstein,
Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 216.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“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 the mystery of the eternity of life, and the
inkling of the marvellous structure of reality, together with the
single-hearted endeavour to comprehend a portion, be it never so tiny, of
the reason that manifests itself in nature.”
Albert Einstein, The World as I See It, Secaucus, New Jersy: The Citadel
Press, 1999, p. 5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naïve.”
Albert Einstein in a letter to Beatrice Frohlich, December 17, 1952;
Einstein Archive 59-797; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded Quotable
Einstein, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 217.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological
concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine
some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near those of
Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity
of the order which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe
that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and
understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human
problem—the most important of all human problems.”
Albert Einstein, 1947; from Banesh Hoffmann, Albert Einstein Creator and
Rebel, New York: New American Library, 1972, p. 95.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I am a deeply religious nonbeliever.… This is a somewhat new kind of
religion.”
Albert Einstein, in a letter to Hans Muehsam, March 30, 1954; Einstein
Archive 38-434; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded Quotable Einstein,
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 218.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of
what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of
human beings.”
Albert Einstein, upon being asked if he believed in God by Rabbi Herbert
Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue, New York, April 24, 1921,
published in the New York Times, April 25, 1929; from Einstein: The Life
and Times, Ronald W. Clark, New York: World Publishing Co., 1971, p. 413;
also cited as a telegram to a Jewish newspaper, 1929, Einstein Archive
33-272, from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded Quotable Einstein,
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 204.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics
to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.”
Albert Einstein, letter to a Baptist pastor in 1953; from Albert Einstein
the Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New
Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 39.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Why do you write to me ‘God should punish the English’? I have no close
connection to either one or the other. I see only with deep regret that
God punishes so many of His children for their numerous stupidities, for
which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion, only His
nonexistence could excuse Him.”
Albert Einstein, letter to Edgar Meyer, a Swiss colleague, January 2,
1915; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded Quotable Einstein,
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 201.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“It is quite possible that we can do greater things than Jesus, for what
is written in the Bible about him is poetically embellished.”
Albert Einstein; quoted in W. I. Hermanns, "A Talk with Einstein," October
1943, Einstein Archive 55-285; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded
Quotable Einstein, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 215.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his
creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own — a God, in short, who
is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the
individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor
such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.”
Albert Einstein, quoted in The New York Times obituary, April 19, 1955;
from George Seldes, ed., The Great Thoughts, New York: Ballantine Books,
1996, p. 134. )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The most important human endeavor is the striving for morality in our
actions. Our inner balance and even our very existence depend on it. Only
morality in our actions can give beauty and dignity to life. To make this
a living force and bring it to clear consciousness is perhaps the foremost
task of education. The foundation of morality should not be made dependent
on myth nor tied to any authority lest doubt about the myth or about the
legitimacy of the authority imperil the foundation of sound judgment and
action.”
Albert Einstein, letter to a minister November 20, 1950; from Albert
Einstein the Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton,
New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 95.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him for the simple
reason that a man's actions are determined by necessity, external and
internal, so that in God's eyes he cannot be responsible, any more than an
inanimate object is responsible for the motions it undergoes. Science has
therefore been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is
unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,
education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man
would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of
punishment and hopes of reward after death. It is therefore easy to see
why the churches have always fought science and persecuted its devotees.”
Albert Einstein, "Religion and Science," in the New York Times Magazine,
November 9, 1930, pp. 3-4; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded
Quotable Einstein, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press,
2000, pp. 205-206.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The religious feeling engendered by experiencing the logical
comprehensibility of profound interrelations is of a somewhat different
sort from the feeling that one usually calls religious. It is more a
feeling of awe at the scheme that is manifested in the material universe.
It does not lead us to take the step of fashioning a god-like being in our
own image-a personage who makes demands of us and who takes an interest in
us as individuals. There is in this neither a will nor a goal, nor a must,
but only sheer being. For this reason, people of our type see in morality
a purely human matter, albeit the most important in the human sphere.”
Albert Einstein, letter to a Rabbi in Chicago; from Albert Einstein the
Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton University
Press, 1981, pp. 69-70.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that
could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a
magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and
that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a
genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism.”
Albert Einstein, replying to a letter in 1954 or 1955; from Albert
Einstein the Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton,
New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 39.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I do not believe that a man should be restrained in his daily actions by
being afraid of punishment after death or that he should do things only
because in this way he will be rewarded after he dies. This does not make
sense. The proper guidance during the life of a man should be the weight
that he puts upon ethics and the amount of consideration that he has for
others.”
Albert Einstein; from Peter A. Bucky, The Private Albert Einstein, Kansas
City: Andrews & McMeel, 1992, p. 86.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place
is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action
of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined
to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish
addressed to a supernatural Being.”
Albert Einstein in responce to a child who had written him in 1936 and
asked if scientists pray; from Albert Einstein the Human Side, Helen Dukas
and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University
Press, 1981, p. 32.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the
actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of
his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic
causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern
science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of
determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the
infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with
our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. Morality
is of the highest importance — but for us, not for God.”
Albert Einstein; from Albert Einstein the Human Side, Helen Dukas and
Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press,
1981, p. 66.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The finest emotion of which we are capable is the mystic emotion. Herein
lies the germ of all art and all true science. Anyone to whom this feeling
is alien, who is no longer capable of wonderment and lives in a state of
fear is a dead man. To know that what is impenatrable for us really exists
and manifests itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty,
whose gross forms alone are intelligible to our poor faculties – this
knowledge, this feeling … that is the core of the true religious
sentiment. In this sense, and in this sense alone, I rank myself amoung
profoundly religious men.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am
unable to take seriously.”
Albert Einstein, letter to Hoffman and Dukas, 1946; from Albert Einstein
the Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New
Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1981.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain
it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through
the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through
striving after rational knowledge.”
Albert Einstein, Science and Religion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I cannot believe that God plays dice with the cosmos.”
Albert Einstein on quantum mechanics, published in the London Observer,
April 5, 1964; also quoted as "God does not play dice with the world." in
Einstein: The Life and Times, Ronald W. Clark, New York: World Publishing
Co., 1971, p. 19.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I cannot accept any concept of God based on the fear of life or the fear
of death or blind faith. I cannot prove to you that there is no personal
God, but if I were to speak of him I would be a liar.”
Albert Einstein; from Ronald W. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times, New
York: World Publishing Company, 1971, p. 622.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“During the youthful period of mankind's spiritual evolution human fantasy
created gods in man's own image, who, by the operations of their will were
supposed to determine, or at any rate to influence, the phenomenal world.
Man sought to alter the disposition of these gods in his own favor by
means of magic and prayer. The idea of God in the religions taught at
present is a sublimation of that old concept of the gods. Its
anthropomorphic character is shown, for instance, by the fact that men
appeal to the Divine Being in prayers and plead for the fulfillment of
their wishes.
“Nobody, certainly, will deny that the idea of the existence of an
omnipotent, just, and omnibeneficent personal God is able to accord man
solace, help, and guidance; also, by virtue of its simplicity it is
accessible to the most undeveloped mind. But, on the other hand, there are
decisive weaknesses attached to this idea in itself, which have been
painfully felt since the beginning of history. That is, if this being is
omnipotent, then every occurrence, including every human action, every
human thought, and every human feeling and aspiration is also His work;
how is it possible to think of holding men responsible for their deeds and
thoughts before such an almighty Being? In giving out punishment and
rewards He would to a certain extent be passing judgment on Himself. How
can this be combined with the goodness and righteousness ascribed to Him?
“The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres of
religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God. It is the
aim of science to establish general rules which determine the reciprocal
connection of objects and events in time and space. For these rules, or
laws of nature, absolutely general validity is required—not proven. It is
mainly a program, and faith in the possibility of its accomplishment in
principle is only founded on partial successes. But hardly anyone could be
found who would deny these partial successes and ascribe them to human
self-deception. The fact that on the basis of such laws we are able to
predict the temporal behavior of phenomena in certain domains with great
precision and certainty is deeply embedded in the consciousness of the
modern man, even though he may have grasped very little of the contents of
those laws. He need only consider that planetary courses within the solar
system may be calculated in advance with great exactitude on the basis of
a limited number of simple laws. In a similar way, though not with the
same precision, it is possible to calculate in advance the mode of
operation of an electric motor, a transmission system, or of a wireless
apparatus, even when dealing with a novel development.
“To be sure, when the number of factors coming into play in a
phenomenological complex is too large, scientific method in most cases
fails us. One need only think of the weather, in which case prediction
even for a few days ahead is impossible. Nevertheless no one doubts that
we are confronted with a causal connection whose causal components are in
the main known to us. Occurrences in this domain are beyond the reach of
exact prediction because of the variety of factors in operation, not
because of any lack of order in nature.
“We have penetrated far less deeply into the regularities obtaining within
the realm of living things, but deeply enough nevertheless to sense at
least the rule of fixed necessity. One need only think of the systematic
order in heredity, and in the effect of poisons, as for instance alcohol,
on the behavior of organic beings. What is still lacking here is a grasp
of connections of profound generality, but not a knowledge of order in
itself.
“The more a man is imbued with the ordered regularity of all events the
firmer becomes his conviction that there is no room left by the side of
this ordered regularity for causes of a different nature. For him neither
the rule of human nor the rule of divine will exists as an independent
cause of natural events. To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God
interfering with natural events could never be refuted, in the real sense,
by science, for this doctrine can always take refuge in those domains in
which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot.
“But I am persuaded that such behavior on the part of the representatives
of religion would not only be unworthy but also fatal. For a doctrine
which is able to maintain itself not in clear light but only in the dark,
will of necessity lose its effect on mankind, with incalculable harm to
human progress. In their struggle for the ethical good, teachers of
religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God,
that is, give up that source of fear and hope which in the past placed
such vast power in the hands of priests. In their labors they will have to
avail themselves of those forces which are capable of cultivating the
Good, the True, and the Beautiful in humanity itself. This is, to be sure,
a more difficult but an incomparably more worthy task.”
Albert Einstein, Science and Religion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I cannot then believe in this concept of an anthropomorphic God who has
the powers of interfering with these natural laws. As I said before, the
most beautiful and most profound religious emotion that we can experience
is the sensation of the mystical. And this mysticality is the power of all
true science.”
Albert Einstein; from Peter A. Bucky, The Private Albert Einstein, Kansas
City: Andrews & McMeel, 1992, p. 86.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the
rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no
more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences
consist of reproductions, and combinations of sensory impressions, the
concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of
meaning.”
Albert Einstein, in a letter February 5, 1921; from Albert Einstein the
Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, eds., Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press, 1981, p. 40.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Mere unbelief in a personal God is no philosophy at all.”
Albert Einstein, letter to V. T Aaltonen, May 7, 1952, Einstein Archive
59-059; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The Expanded Quotable Einstein,
Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 216.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a
childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the
crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to
a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination
received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the
weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.”
Albert Einstein, to Guy H. Raner Jr., September 28, 1949; from Michael R.
Gilmore, "Einstein's God: Just What Did Einstein Believe About God?,"
Skeptic, 1997, 5(2):64.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and
outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary.
Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought
and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between
facts.”
Albert Einstein, Out of My Later Years, Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood
Press, 1970, p. 25.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human
mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God.
But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of
such views.”
Albert Einstein, according to the testimony of Prince Hubertus of
Lowenstein; as quoted by Ronald W. Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times,
New York: World Publishing Company, 1971, p. 425.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I received your letter of June 10th. I have never talked to a Jesuit
priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies
about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have
always been an atheist. Your counter-arguments seem to me very correct and
could hardly be better formulated. It is always misleading to use
anthropomorphical concepts in dealing with things outside the human
sphere—childish analogies. We have to admire in humility the beautiful
harmony of the structure of this world as far—as we can grasp it. And that
is all.”
Albert Einstein, to Guy H. Raner Jr., July 2, 1945, responding to a rumor
that a Jesuit priest had caused Einstein to convert from atheism; from
Michael R. Gilmore, "Einstein's God: Just What Did Einstein Believe About
God?," Skeptic, 1997, 5(2):62.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“I am convinced that some political and social activities and practices of
the Catholic organizations are detrimental and even dangerous for the
community as a whole, here and everywhere. I mention here only the fight
against birth control at a time when overpopulation in various countries
has become a serious threat to the health of people and a grave obstacle
to any attempt to organize peace on this planet.”
Albert Einstein in a letter, 1954; from Paul Blanshard, American Freedom
and Catholic Power, Greenwood Pub., 1984, p. 10.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“It is quite clear to me that the religious paradise of youth, which [I]
lost, was a first attempt to free myself from the chains of the ‘merely
personal,’ from an existence which is dominated by wishes, hopes, and
primitive feelings.”
Albert Einstein; from Gerald Holton, Einstein: History, and Other
Passions, Woodbury, NY: Perseus Press, 1996, p. 172.
-- 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 l'europa e l'america di inizio '800 (cioè un paio di secoli fa),
Devi avere letto un altro libro. Oppure la tua avversione verso Dawkins 
(che in effetti fa rosicare parecchia gente) non ti permette di 
esprimerti in modo lucido ed equilibrato. Infatti non puoi trattenerti 
dal dargli del cialtrone poche righe dopo.
Luca Fraggante
-- 
Ciò che è affermato senza prova può essere negato senza prova.
http://sn.im/a3oxv
       -       
http://www.godisimaginary.com/

 dal dargli del cialtrone poche righe dopo.
Non hai capito bene cosa ho scritto e neppure l'ironia con cui ho definito
il libro di Dawkins (di cui ho letto solo la comica prefazione dedicata a
Lalla, e m'è bastato) un libro di attualità per i primi anni dell'800,
ovvero un libro di scarso interesse e scarsissima originalità oggi.
Fatta un po' di tara al fatto che il libro si rivolge essenzialmente alla
società statunitense, con tutti i suoi richiami retorici alla religiosità
rappresentata, trovo infatti ridicolo (ma pecunia non olet, vero Richard?)
che oggi si scriva un libro per affermare che sì, davvero, oggi si può
essere atei (che scoperta!).
Un tale approccio mi fa pensare proprio a coloro cui si rivolgeva Einstein
quando scriveva: "...I do not share the crusading spirit of the
professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of
liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth."
In conclusioni le icone e i santini, per laici che siano, li lascio
volentieri a chi è debole di pensiero e ha la necessità insopprimibile di
rifarsi a qualche caposcuola, vero o presunto che sia, per decidere in
cosa credere. 
Saluti,
Aleph


 sia, per decidere in cosa credere. 
Caposcuola tipo Einstein? Anch'io non sopporto più di vederlo tirato 
sempre in ballo da chiunque per supportare qualsiasi causa e la sua 
causa contraria.


 causa contraria.
Ah strano..., non è forse Dawkins che lo ha tirato in ballo per primo?
P.S.:
Piccola digressione.
Mi chiedevo quanti lettori entusiasti di Dawkins, su ICA, alle elezioni
politiche abbiano votato per il partito neoclericale di Veltroni e Rutelli.
Sarebbe interessante saperlo, anche per capire come la tendenza parolaia
al radicalismo ateo lasci spesso lo spazio a comportamenti che dal punto
di vista pratico si configurano, nei fatti, come filoclericali.
Meditate gente, meditate... 


 primo? 
Non avendo letto il libro non puoi sapere perché lo ha fatto e in quale 
contesto, ma continua pure a parlare di ciò che non sai e a citare 
Einstein se ti va.


 sta parlando...
Ah, perché quello sarebbe un libro di divulgazione scientifica?
Ma lo sai cos'è la divulgazione scientifica?
In quanto ad Einstein lo scrive Flew nella lettera di apertura di questo
thread a che proposito viene citato Einstein e lui il libro l'ha letto. 
Saluti,
Aleph
P.S.: Come mai hai censurato la parte politica? 
Ti ha dato fastidio scoprirti amico dei preti?


Comincio a  dubitarne
Domandina: tu sei ateo o credente?
Saluti da Bhisma
-- 
... e il pensier libero, č la mia fé!

 Ti ha dato fastidio scoprirti amico dei preti?
Ma di che parli, devo risponderti punto a punto? Non sono nemmeno andato 
a votare, se ti interessa. 
E poi non starai mica dicendo che non ci sono schieramenti politici che 
difendono apertamente la laicità dello Stato per cui potrei votare? Noi 
atei siamo tutelatissimi e ben rappresentati, no? I libri come quello di 
Dawkins sono inutili, no?


 Domandina: tu sei ateo o credente?
Ateo. Da 35 anni circa.
Saluti,
Aleph 


 Dawkins sono inutili, no?
Personalmente ritengo che, almeno per la realtà italiana, un solo Pannella
conti come un milione di Dawkins.
Saluti,
Aleph


 CUT
Non è mia intenzione litigare come hai fatto con Fraggante; io comunque il
libro di Dawkins l'ho letto, anche recentemente, e devo dire che mi è
piaciuto.
Non è nulla di eccezzionale e forse per chi conosce l'autore (nel mio caso
è il primo libro di Dawkins che leggo) è un pò deludente; cmq, a mio
avviso, rimane pur sempre un buon libro.
Ciao
-- 
La donna che ti costa meno la paghi !!!.


 casoma parte.
 
Beh, e' un libro che espone una o piu' tesi, che al contrario di una fede
possono essere accettate o respinte ma non hanno dogmi irrinunciabili e per
confutarle probabilmente bisognerebbe averlo letto.
(questo a me sembra ovvio eh)
E sinceramente, se mai dovessi scrivere un libro, spero che nessuno
lo giudichi dall'indice:-)
bye
-- 
"I limiti del mio linguaggio significano i limiti del mio mondo."
Ludwig Wittgenstein
::
www.freefred.org
::

 i due cialtronacci (Flew e Dawkins)
vero, come 2+2 fa 4. :-)
Dawkins piu che a un biologo assomiglia a un Teologo-scienziato: nel
senso che ha creduto nel libro-banconota verde... e poi ha fatto
esperimenti riuscitissimi!!! Uah uah!! Scrive cazzate e poi le
smentisce dopo una 10ina d'anni cosi ne esce pulito e ricco.
Va inserito nell'olimpo delle scie chimiche, i cerchi nel grano, gli
UFS (stronzi che volano), raeliani, il cicap!!!, la memoria
dell'acqua, ...e tutto questo sottobosco di imbecillità.
Intelligente chi non solo non compra i libri, ma anche chi non li
legge. Risparmia soldi e tempo.
saluti
fuzzy