At The Heart Of The Matter
"Ideas and Opinions", 3rd Edition by Albert Einstein from BarnesAndNoble.com or from Amazon.com. Based on Mein Weltbild. Edited by Carl Seelig, and other sources. New translations and revisions by Sonja Bargmann. ISBN: 0-517-88440-2. Pages 46-47.
My favorite and dearest passage:
"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?"**
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."*
Baruch Spinoza
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinoza
"Spinoza contended that "Deus sive Natura" ("God or Nature") was a being of infinitely many attributes, of which extension and thought were two. His account of the nature of reality, then, seems to treat the physical and mental worlds as one and the same. The universal substance consists of both body and mind, there being no difference between these aspects. This formulation is a historically significant solution to the mind-body problem known as neutral monism. The consequences of Spinoza's system also envisage a God that does not rule over the universe by providence, but a God which itself is the deterministic system of which everything in nature is a part. Thus, God is the natural world and He has no personality."
"As a youth he first subscribed to Descartes's dualistic belief that body and mind are two separate substances, but later changed his view and asserted that they were not separate, being a single identity. He contended that everything that exists in Nature/Universe is one Reality (substance) and there is only one set of rules governing the whole of the reality which surrounds us and of which we are part. Spinoza viewed God and Nature as two names for the same reality, namely the single substance (meaning "that which stands beneath" rather than "matter") that is the basis of the universe and of which all lesser "entities" are actually modes or modifications, that all things are determined by Nature to exist and cause effects, and that the complex chain of cause and effect is only understood in part. That humans presume themselves to have free will, he argues, is a result of their awareness of appetites while being unable to understand the reasons why they want and act as they do."
"Spinoza was a thoroughgoing determinist who held that absolutely everything that happens occurs through the operation of necessity. For him, even human behavior is fully determined, with freedom being our capacity to know we are determined and to understand why we act as we do. So freedom is not the possibility to say "no" to what happens to us but the possibility to say "yes" and fully understand why things should necessarily happen that way. By forming more "adequate" ideas about what we do and our emotions or affections, we become the adequate cause of our effects (internal or external), which entails an increase in activity (versus passivity). This means that we become both more free and more like God, as Spinoza argues in the Scholium to Prop. 49, Part II. However, Spinoza also held that everything must necessarily happen the way that it does. Therefore, humans have no free will. They believe, however, that their will is free. In his letter to G. H. Schaller (Letter 62), he wrote: "men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined."
"Spinoza's philosophy has much in common with Stoicism in as much as both philosophies sought to fulfill a therapeutic role by instructing people how to attain happiness (or eudemonia, for the Stoics). However, Spinoza differed sharply from the Stoics in one important respect: he utterly rejected their contention that reason could defeat emotion. On the contrary, he contended, an emotion can only be displaced or overcome by a stronger emotion. For him, the crucial distinction was between active and passive emotions, the former being those that are rationally understood and the latter those that are not. He also held that knowledge of true causes of passive emotion can transform it to an active emotion, thus anticipating one of the key ideas of Sigmund Freud's psychoanalysis."
"Given Spinoza's insistence on a completely ordered world where "necessity" reigns, Good and Evil have no absolute meaning. Human catastrophes, social injustices, etc. are merely apparent. The world as it exists looks imperfect only because of our limited perception."
On Baruch Spinoza: "In my opinion, his opinions have not gained general acceptance by all those striving for clarity and logical rigor only because they require not only consistency of thought but also unusual integrity, magnanimity - and modesty."****p.152.
"In living through this "great epoch," it is difficult to reconcile oneself to the fact that one belongs to that mad, degenerate species that boasts of its free will. How I wish that somewhere there existed an island for those who are wise and of good will! In such a place even I should be an ardent patriot!"****p.4.
"Everything that the human race has done and thought is concerned with the satisfaction of deeply felt needs and the assuagement of pain. One has to keep this constantly in mind if one wishes to understand spiritual movements and their development. Feeling and longing are the motive forces behind all human endeavors and human creations."*
"No idea is conceived in our mind independent of our five senses."*
"A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants."** - Arthur Schopenhauer
A second German to English translation: "A man can do as he will, but not will as he will."*** - Arthur Schopenhauer
"I think we have to safeguard ourselves against people who are a menace to others, quite apart from what may have motivated their deeds."*
"I am not for punishment at all, but only for measures that save society and protect it."*
"The important thing is not to stop questioning."*
"Curiosity is a delicate little plant which, aside from stimulation, stands mainly in need of freedom."*
"I don't try to imagine a God; it suffices to stand in awe of the structure of the world, insofar as it allows our inadequate senses to appreciate it."*
"A man's moral worth is not measured by what his religious beliefs are, but rather by what emotional impulses he has received from Nature."*
"Upon reading books on philosophy, I learned that I stood there like a blind man in front of a painting. I can grasp only the inductive method ... the works of speculative philosophy are beyond my reach."*
"Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning."*
"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals...."*
"Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."*
"I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the kind that we experience in ourselves."*
"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.... It is enough for me to contemplate the mystery of conscious life perpetuating itself through all eternity, to reflect upon the marvelous structure of the universe which we can dimly perceive and to try humbly to comprehend even an infinitesimal part of the intelligence manifested in Nature."*
"I do not believe in the immortality of the individual...."*
"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."****p.321
"I am not an atheist."* "My position concerning God is that of an agnostic."*
"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 makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."****p.336
"Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source.... They are creatures who can't hear the music of the spheres."****p.337
"It is quite possible that we can do greater things than Jesus, for what is written in the Bible about him is poetically embellished."****p.337
"I never think of the future. It comes soon enough."*
"I have finished my task here."* - Albert Einstein as he was dying.
"Our death is not an end if we have lived on in our children and the younger generation. For they are us; our bodies are only wilted leaves on the tree of life."****p.91.
"Why you don't really have free will" By Jerry A. Coyne
"http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2012-01-01/free-will-science-religion/52317624/1"
"There's not much downside to abandoning the notion of free will. It's impossible, anyway, to act as though we don't have it: you'll pretend to choose your New Year's resolutions, and the laws of physics will determine whether you keep them. And there are two upsides. The first is realizing the great wonder and mystery of our evolved brains, and contemplating the notion that things like consciousness, free choice, and even the idea of "me" are but convincing illusions fashioned by natural selection. Further, by losing free will we gain empathy, for we realize that in the end all of us, whether Bernie Madoffs or Nelson Mandelas, are victims of circumstance — of the genes we're bequeathed and the environments we encounter. With that under our belts, we can go about building a kinder world."
"Why Evolution Is True" by Jerry A. Coyne
Published 2009
ISBN-10: 0670020532
ISBN-13: 978-0670020539
http://jerrycoyne.uchicago.edu/index.html
"Politics
For better or worse, dispelling the illusion of free will has political implications---because liberals and conservatives are not equally in thrall to it. Liberals tend to understand that a person can be lucky or unlucky in all matters relevant to his success. Conservatives, however, often make a religious fetish out of individualism. Many seem to have absolutely no awareness of how fortunate one must be to succeed at anything in life, no matter how hard one works. One must be lucky to be able to work. One must be lucky to be intelligent, physically healthy, and not be bankrupted in middle age by the illness of a spouse.
Consider the biography of a "self-made" man, and you will find that his success was entirely dependent on background conditions that he did not make and of which he was merely the beneficiary. There is not a person on earth who chose his genome, or the country of his birth, or the political and economic conditions that prevailed at the moment crucial to his progress. And yet, living in America, one gets the distinct sense that if certain conservatives were asked why they weren't born with club feet or orphaned before the age of five, they would not hesitate to take credit for these accomplishments.
Even if you have struggled to make the most of what nature gave you, you must still admit that your ability and inclination to struggle is part of your inheritance. How much credit does a person deserve for not being lazy? None at all. Laziness, like diligence, is a neurological condition. Of course, conservatives are right to think that we must encourage people to work to the best of their abilities and discourage free riders wherever we can. And it is wise to hold people responsible for their actions when doing so influences their behavior and brings benefit to society. But this does not mean that we must be taken in by the illusion of free will. We need only acknowledge that efforts matter and that people can change. We do not change ourselves, precisely---because we have only ourselves with which to do the changing---but we continually influence, and are influenced by, the world around us and the world within us. It may seem paradoxical to hold people responsible for what happens in their corner of the universe, but once we break the spell of free will, we can do this precisely to the degree that it is useful. Where people can change, we can demand that they do so. Where change is impossible, or unresponsive to demands, we can chart some other course. In improving ourselves and society, we are working directly with the forces of nature, for there is nothing but nature itself to work with."
- Sam Harris in his book, Free Will.
"Free Will" by Sam Harris
http://www.amazon.com/Free-Will-Sam-Harris/dp/1451683405/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1333286388&sr=8-1
Published 2012
ISBN-10: 1451683405
ISBN-13: 978-1451683400