Никого не хочу обидеть, просто излагаю факты. Вот, пост www.babyblog.ru/community/post/religii/672208, из которого я хотела бы процитировать следующее: "... следует отметить, что чем выше IQ человека, чем более критический склад мышления он имеет, тем больших усилий будет от него требовать поддержание подобного "двоемыслия" в своем сознании. И, в конце концов, начиная с некоего порога интеллекта, подобному человеку будет проще стать атеистом, даже если бы он и сознавал, какие выгоды он теряет из-за того, что не может стать умеренно религиозным. Например, 93% сотрудников Национальной академии наук в США в Бога не верят, и это не простое совпадение, учитывая, что в США, согласно опросам, атеисты и агностики составляют от 3 до 9% населения." (Шапиро Максим).
А вот, ещё статья на эту же тему со всевозможными ссылками на достоверные источники. К сожалению, статья пока только на английском даётся в Википедии, может, когда-то у меня доберутся руки до того, чтобы её перевести на русский и другие языки, не мешало бы ещё на испанский, арабский и турецкий, чтоб знали, своё местечко, когда речь заходит об интеллекте. Вот, текст статьи на 23 апреля 2010 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence):
Religiosity and intelligence From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search
The topic of religiosity and intelligence pertains to relationships between intelligence and religiosity, the extent to which someone is religious. Multiple studies have been undertaken to examine these relationships.
Intelligence is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, some psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence [1][2].
A widely-researched index or classification of intelligence among scientists is Intelligence Quotient (I.Q.). I.Q. is a summary index, calculated by testing individuals' abilities in a variety of tasks and producing a composite score to represent overall ability, e.g., Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale. It is used to predict educational outcomes and other variables of interest.
Others have attempted to measure intelligence indirectly by looking at individuals' or group's educational attainment, although this risks bias from other demographic factors, such as age, income, gender and cultural background, all of which can affect educational attainment.[1]
Dissatisfaction with traditional IQ tests has led to the development of alternative theories, all of which suggest that intelligence is the result of independent abilities that contribute to human performance. In 1983, Howard Gardner proposed the theory of multiple intelligences, which claims a broadening of the conventional definition of intelligence is needed, since, if intelligence is defined as the cognitive or mental capacity of an individual, this would logically include all forms of mental qualities, not simply the ones most transparent to standardized I.Q. tests. The categories of intelligences Gardner proposes are logical, linguistic, spatial, musical, kinesthetic, naturalist, intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences.[3]
Jean Piaget developed stages as an alternative to IQ after studying the nature of the wrong answers on items. The Model of hierarchical complexity was formed as an alternative to IQ. Performance on the items varying in hierarchical complexity from 0 to 14, is absolute, and does not require norms. Because the orders are content and context free, they can be used to measure performance in any domain, including the ones mention by Gardner and Goleman.
Religiosity is a sociological term referring to degrees of religious behaviour, belief or spirituality. The measurement of religiosity is hampered by the difficulties involved in defining what is meant by the term. Numerous studies have explored the different components of religiosity, with most finding some distinction between religious beliefs/ doctrine, religious practice, and spirituality. Studies can measure religious practice by counting attendance at religious services, religious beliefs/ doctrine by asking a few doctrinal questions, while spirituality can be measured by asking respondents about their sense of oneness with the divine or through detailed standardized measurements. When religiosity is measured, it is important to specify which aspects of religiosity are referred to.
In 2008, intelligence researcher Helmuth Nyborg examined whether IQ relates to denomination and income, using representative data from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth, which includes intelligence tests on a representative selection of American youth, where they have also replied to questions about religious belief. His results, published in the scientific journal Intelligence demonstrated that on average, Atheists scored 1.95 IQ points higher than Agnostics, 3.82 points higher than Liberal persuasions, and 5.89 IQ points higher than Dogmatic persuasions. [4]"I'm not saying that believing in God makes you dumber. My hypothesis is that people with a low intelligence are more easily drawn toward religions, which give answers that are certain, while people with a high intelligence are more skeptical," says the professor.[5]
The relationship between countries' belief in a god and average Intelligence Quotient, measured by Lynn, Harvey & Nyborg.[6]
Nyborg also co-authored a study with Richard Lynn, emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Ulster, which compared religious belief and average national IQs in 137 countries. [6] The study analysed the issue from several viewpoints. Firstly, using data from a U.S. study of 6,825 adolescents, the authors found that atheists scored 6 g-IQ points higher than those adhering to a religion.
Secondly, the authors investigated the link between religiosity and intelligence on a country level. Among the sample of 137 countries, only 23 (17%) had more than 20% of atheists, which constituted “virtually all the higher IQ countries.” The authors reported a correlation of 0.60 between atheism rates and level of intelligence, which is “highly statistically significant.” This portion of the study uses the same data set as Lynn's work IQ and the Wealth of Nations.
Commenting on the study in The Daily Telegraph, Lynn said "Why should fewer academics believe in God than the general population? I believe it is simply a matter of the IQ. Academics have higher IQs than the general population. Several Gallup poll studies of the general population have shown that those with higher IQs tend not to believe in God,"[7]
[edit]Studies comparing religious belief/behaviour and Emotional Intelligence
A small 2004 study by Ellen Paek empirically examined the extent to which religiosity, operationalized as religious orientation and religious behaviour, is related to Emotional Intelligence.[8] Paek surveyed 148 church-attending adult Christians and found that religious orientation was positively correlated with overall EI and its subcomponent emotional understanding. While the number of religious group activities was positively associated with EI, years of church attendance was unrelated. Significant positive correlations were also found between level of religious commitment and EI. Both attitudinal and behavioral measures of religiosity were significant predictors of EI, particularly the former.
In their 2002 article, entitled “Linking emotional intelligence, spirituality and workplace performance: Definitions, models and ideas for research”, Tischler, Biberman and McKeage (2002) reviewed literature on both EI and various aspect of spirituality and found that both appear to lead to similar attitudes, behaviours and skills, and that there often seems to be confusion, intersection and linking between the two constructs. [9]
[edit]Studies comparing religious belief and educational attainment
In 1975, Norman Poythress studied a sample of 234 US college undergraduates, grouping them into relatively homogeneous religious types based on the similarity of their religious beliefs, and compared their personality characteristics. He found that "Literally-oriented religious Believers did not differ significantly from Mythologically-oriented Believers on measures of intelligence, authoritarianism, or racial prejudice. Religious Believers as a group were found to be significantly less intelligent and more authoritarian than religious Skeptics." He used SAT's as a measure of intelligence for this study.[10]
In the US, according to raw data from the 2004 General Social Survey, those with graduate degrees were the least likely to believe in the afterlife or the Bible as the word of God, suggesting a link between religious disbelief and higher educational attainment. [11]
A weak negative correlation between education and Christian fundamentalism was found by Burton et al. (1989), a small study comparing the religious beliefs and educational achievements of white, Protestant residents of Delaware County, Indiana. Contrary to the researchers' expectations, fundamentalist converts were not less educated people.[12]
[edit]Studies comparing religious behaviour and educational attainment
In Australia, 23% of Christian church attenders have earned a university or postgraduate degree, whereas the figure for the general population is 13%.[13]Christianity is the predominant religion in Australia, although adherence is falling.[14] Commentators on the Survey attribute the educational levels to sociological factors, such as age, class and income, making no claims about intelligence.[13][15]
Studies of Mormons in the US show that Mormons with higher education attend church more regularly than uneducated Mormons. Survey research indicated that 41% of Mormons with only elementary school education attend church regularly. By contrast, 76% of Mormon college graduates attend church regularly and 78% of Mormons who went beyond their college degrees to do graduate study attend church regularly.[16]
^Paek, Ellen (2006). "Religiosity and perceived emotional intelligence among Christians". Personality and Individual Differences (International Society for the Study of Individual Differences) 41 (3): 479–490. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.01.016. ISSN0191-8869.
^Kaldor, Peter (1987). Who Goes Where? Who Doesn't Care? : Going to Church in Australia. Sydney: Homebush West: Lancer / ANZEA,.
^ Stan L. Albrecht, "The Consequential Dimension of Mormon Religiosity" Latter-Day Saint Social Life, Social Research on the LDS Church and its Members, (Provo, Utah: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1998), 286.
"Is atheism linked to intelligence?" Review of Satoshi Kanazawa, “Why liberals and atheists are more intelligent,” Social Psychology Quarterly 73(1): 33-57.
ну, вообще то есть и русские источники, которые это практически дублируют выводы. Русские ислледования в СОЦИСе.Не помню номер конечно, делал диплом по воздействию религии на общество, лет 10 назад, все данные там есть . В действительности получаеться чем выше страта тем больше в старте людей с высшим образованием и меньше верующих. IQ не универсальный тест, но данные какие некакие дает. Но, это не относиться к отдельному человеку, поскольку, как известно:если мой сосед бьет свою жену ежедневно, а я - никогда , то по статистике мы бьем жену через день(Б.Шоу).
Ой, спасибо, что посмешили :))
Но, это не относиться к отдельному человеку, поскольку, как известно:если мой сосед бьет свою жену ежедневно, а я - никогда , то по статистике мы бьем жену через день(Б.Шоу).
Это весьма спорный вопрос!
В психологии много исследований на эту тему. И большинство исследователей придерживаются точки зрения, что религиозность находится в сфере бессознательного, эмоционального...
А интеллект- это сознание. Так что это несвязанные, различные вещи.
Предлагаю почитать книгу, указанную в конце этого ответа, признанного лучшим на сайте:
http://otvety.google.ru/otvety/thread?tid=2bc191e0be8c550a
KeJSaR [Студент младших курсов] 04.10.2009 2:56:58 Сообщить о нарушении
Религиозные взгляды Эйнштейна являются предметом давних споров. Некоторые утверждают, что Эйнштейн верил в существование Бога, другие называют его атеистом. И те и другие использовали для подтверждения своей точки зрения слова великого учёного.
В 1921 году Эйнштейн получил телеграмму от нью-йоркского раввина Герберта Гольдштейна: «Верите ли вы в Бога тчк оплаченный ответ 50 слов». Эйнштейн уложился в 24 слова: «Я верю в Бога Спинозы, который проявляет себя в закономерной гармонии бытия, но вовсе не в Бога, который хлопочет о судьбах и делах людей». Ещё более резко он выразился в интервью «Нью-Йорк Таймс» (ноябрь 1930 года): «Я не верю в Бога, который награждает и карает, в Бога, цели которого слеплены с наших человеческих целей. Я не верю в бессмертие души, хотя слабые умы, одержимые страхом или нелепым эгоизмом, находят себе пристанище в такой вере».
В 1940 году он описал свои взгляды в журнале «Nature», в статье под названием «Наука и религия». Там он пишет:
По моему мнению, религиозно просвещённый человек — это тот, кто в максимально возможной для него степени освободил себя от пут эгоистических желаний и поглощён мыслями, чувствами и стремлениями, которых он придерживается ввиду их сверхличностного характера… безотносительно от того, делается ли попытка связать это с божественным существом, ибо в противном случае нельзя было бы считать Будду или Спинозу религиозными личностями. Религиозность такого человека состоит в том, что у него нет сомнений в значимости и величии этих сверхличностных целей, которые не могут быть рационально обоснованы, но в этом и не нуждаются… В этом смысле религия — древнее стремление человечества ясно и полностью осознать эти ценности и цели и усиливать и расширять их влияние.
Далее он утверждает, что все конфликты между наукой и религией «происходили в результате фатальных ошибок», в результате непонимания того, что «сферы религии и науки сами по себе ясно разграничены». В то же время «между ними существует сильная взаимосвязь и взаимозависимость». «Наука без религии хрома, религия без науки слепа… Подлинного конфликта между религией и наукой не может быть». Он снова пишет, что не верит в персонифицированного Бога, и заявляет:
Не существует ни господства человека, ни господства божества как независимых причин явлений природы. Конечно, доктрина Бога как личности, вмешивающейся в природные явления, никогда не может быть в буквальном смысле опровергнута наукой, ибо эта доктрина может всегда найти убежище в тех областях, куда научное знание ещё не способно проникнуть. Но я убеждён, что такое поведение части представителей религии не только недостойно, но и фатально.
В 1950 году в письме М. Берковитцу Эйнштейн писал: «По отношению к Богу я агностик. Я убеждён, что для отчётливого понимания первостепенной важности нравственных принципов в деле улучшения и облагораживания жизни не требуется понятие законодателя, особенно — законодателя, работающего по принципу награды и наказания».
В последние годы
Ещё раз Эйнштейн описал свои религиозные взгляды, отвечая тем, кто приписывал ему веру в иудео-христианского Бога:
То, что вы читали о моих религиозных убеждениях — разумеется, ложь, которая систематически повторяется. Я не верю в персонифицированного Бога, и я никогда не отрицал этого, но выразил это отчетливо. Если во мне есть что-то, что можно назвать религиозным, то это только безграничное восхищение устройством мира, насколько наша наука способна его постичь.
В 1954 году, за полтора года до смерти, Эйнштейн так охарактеризовал свое отношение к религии: «Слово „Бог“ для меня всего лишь проявление и продукт человеческих слабостей, а Библия — свод почтенных, но все же примитивных легенд, которые, тем не менее, являются довольно ребяческими. Никакая, даже самая изощрённая, интерпретация не сможет это (для меня) изменить».
Наиболее полный обзор религиозных взглядов Эйнштейна опубликовал его друг, Макс Джеммер (англ. Max Jammer), в книге «Эйнштейн и религия» (1999).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein#Religious_views
Religious views Main article: Albert Einstein's religious views
The question of scientific determinism gave rise to questions about Einstein’s position on theological determinism, and whether or not he believed in God, or in a god. In 1929, Einstein told Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein "I believe in Spinoza’s God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."[82] In a 1954 letter, he wrote, "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly.”[83] In a letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind, Einstein remarked, "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still purely primitive, legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."[84]
Einstein had previously explored this belief that man could not understand the nature of God when he gave an interview to Time Magazine explaining:
I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. —Albert Einstein[85]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein%27s_religious_views
Albert Einstein's religious views From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search
Albert Einstein's religious views have been studied in detail by scholars of religion in order to obtain relevant perspectives on the relationship between religion and science.
Contents [hide]
1 Theological determinism
2 Agnosticism
3 Disbelief in a personal god
4 Admiration for structure
5 Three styles of religious belief
6 Humanism and Ethical Culture
7 Enlightenment and liberation
8 Jews, Christianity, and Jesus
9 Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church
10 As a human weakness
11 References
12 External links
//<![CDATA[ if (window.showTocToggle) { var tocShowText = "show"; var tocHideText = "hide"; showTocToggle(); } //]]>
[edit] Theological determinism
The question of scientific determinism gave rise to questions about Einstein's position on theological determinism, and whether or not he believed in God, or in a god. In 1929, Einstein told Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a god who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."[1]
[edit] Agnosticism
In a 1950 letter to M. Berkowitz, Einstein stated that "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."[2]
[edit] Disbelief in a personal god
Einstein also stated: "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." He also said in a conversation with Hubertus, Prince of Löwenstein-Wertheim-Freudenberg, "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."[3]
[edit] Admiration for structure
Einstein clarified his religious views in a letter he wrote in response to those who claimed that he worshipped a conventional god: "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."[4] In his 1949 book The World as I See It, he wrote: "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."[5]
[edit] Three styles of religious belief
In a 1930 New York Times article, Einstein distinguished three styles which are usually intermixed in actual religious belief. A poor understanding of causality causes fear, and the fearful invent supernatural beings. The desire for love and support create a social and moral need for a supreme being; both these styles have an anthropomorphic concept of God. The third style, which Einstein deemed most mature, originates in a deep sense of awe and mystery. He said, "The individual feels [...] the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves in nature [...] and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole." Einstein saw science as an antagonist of the first two styles of religious belief, but as a partner of the third style.[6] As he wrote later, "[E]ven though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other" there are "strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies [...] science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind [...] a legitimate conflict between science and religion cannot exist."[7]
[edit] Humanism and Ethical Culture
Einstein was also a Humanist and a supporter of Ethical Culture. He served on the advisory board of the First Humanist Society of New York.[8][9] For the seventy-fifth anniversary of the New York Society for Ethical Culture, he noted that the idea of Ethical Culture embodied his personal conception of what is most valuable and enduring in religious idealism. He observed, "Without 'ethical culture' there is no salvation for humanity."[10] He was an honorary associate of the British Humanist organisation, the Rationalist Press Association and its journal was among the items present on his desk at his death.
[edit] Enlightenment and liberation
Einstein published a paper in Nature in 1940 entitled "Science and Religion" in which he wrote:[7]
[...] a person who is religiously enlightened appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with thoughts, feelings and aspirations to which he clings because of their super-personal value [...] regardless of whether any attempt is made to unite this content with a Divine Being, for otherwise it would not be possible to count Buddha and Spinoza as religious personalities. Accordingly a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance of those super-personal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation [...] In this sense religion is the age-old endeavour of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these values and goals, and constantly to strengthen their effects." He argued that conflicts between science and religion "have all sprung from fatal errors".
An understanding of causality was fundamental to religious belief. In Einstein's view, "neither the rule of human nor 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 [...] by science, for [it] can always take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot.[11]
[edit] Jews, Christianity, and Jesus
In an interview published by Time magazine, with George Sylvester Viereck[12], Einstein spoke of his feelings about Christianity. Viereck was a Nazi sympathizer who was jailed in America during WW II for being a German propagandist. But at the time of the interview Einstein thought Viereck was Jewish.
Viereck began by asking Einstein if he considered himself a German or a Jew, to which Einstein responded that it was possible to be both. Einstein further elaborated that he considered nationalism to be "the measles of mankind."
Viereck moved along in the interview to ask Einstein if Jews should try to assimilate, to which Einstein replied that, "We Jews have been too eager to sacrifice our idiosyncrasies in order to conform."
Einstein was then asked to what extent he was influenced by Christianity, to which Einstein replied as follows, "As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."
Einstein was then asked if he accepted the "historical existence of Jesus," to which he replied, "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."
[edit] Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church
Einstein has been cited by defenders of Pope Pius XII for a statement he made in a 1940 article for Time magazine. He was quoted by the newsweekly as saying that the Church was the only notable institution that stood against the rise of the Third Reich and its campaign to suppress truth. However, one skeptic has argued that the statement is poorly sourced and that it doesn't necessarily reflect Einstein's views on the matter.[13]
In a 1954 letter to American secularist writer Paul Blanshard, he criticized the Catholic Church's opposition to birth control, saying it would be detrimental to the general population, at a time when there were growing fears about the overpopulation of the planet Earth.[14]
[edit] As a human weakness
In a 1954 letter to Eric Gutkind, Einstein wrote:[15]
[...] The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. These [...] interpretations are highly manifold according to their nature and have almost nothing to do with the original text. For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are also no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them.
Einstein had previously explored this belief that man could not understand the nature of God when he gave an interview to Time magazine explaining:
I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws.
[edit] References
^ Brian, Dennis (1996), Einstein: A Life, New York: John Wiley & Sons, p. 127, ISBN 0-471-11459-6
^ Albert Einstein in a letter to M. Berkowitz, 25 October 1950; Einstein Archive 59–215; from Alice Calaprice, ed., The New Quotable Einstein, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2000, p. 216.
^ "Albert Einstein (1879–1955)". http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/quotes_einstein.html. Retrieved 2007-05-21.
^ Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman (eds) (1981). Albert Einstein, The Human Side. Princeton University Press. p. 43.
^ Einstein, Albert (1949). The World as I See It. New York: Philosophical Library. ISBN 0806527900. http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/worldsee2.html. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
^ "Albert Einstein: Religion and Science". Sacred-texts.com. 1930-11-09. http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm. Retrieved 2009-01-07.
^ a b Einstein, A. (1940). "Science and religion". Nature 146: 605–607. doi:10.1038/146605a0.
^ Stringer-Hye, Richard (1999), "Charles Francis Potter", Dictionary of Unitarian and Universalist Biography, Unitarian Universalist Historical Society, http://www.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/charlesfrancispotter.html, retrieved 2006-05-14
^ Wilson, Edwin H. (1995), "Chapter 2: The Background of Religious Humanism", Genesis of a Humanist Manifesto, The Secular Web Library, http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/edwin_wilson/manifesto/ch2.html, retrieved 2006-05-14
^ Ericson, Edward L. "The Humanist Way: An Introduction to Ethical Humanist Religion". The American Ethical Union. http://ethicalunion.org/ericson2.html. Retrieved 2008-07-23.
^ (Einstein 1940, pp. 605–607)
^ "Einstein & Faith", Time
^ Did Einstein Praise the Church?
^ Albert Einstein in a letter, 1954; from Paul Blanshard, American Freedom and Catholic Power, Greenwood Pub., 1984, p. 10.
^ Randerson, James (2008-05-13). "Childish superstition: Einstein's letter makes view of religion relatively clear". The Guardian (London). http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion. Retrieved 2010-04-23.
[edit] External links
On Religion and Morality A Collection of Einstein's Thoughts
Я атеистка. Сама всегда считала, что вера для слабых людей, легче ждать от кого-то помощи, знать, что все предопределено, чтом самому строить свою жизнь своими силами. Но так уж утверждать, что уровень интеллекта верующих ниже- не стану. Это их выбор, он никому не мешает.
Я не та овца,которой легко управлять при помощи религии...И мой Бог не тот,при помощи которого манипулируют сильные мира сего в разные эпохи....Есть ли у меня интеллект...Судить не мне.
http://www.babyblog.ru/user/stillett/907236
а как насчет тех, кто пришел к существованию Бога путем умовыводов?
Только не спрашивайте, как именно, и возможно ли это вообще.
Но одни слепо верят, потому что им тупо нужно во что-то верить. А кто-то не верит, потому что ему никто, видите ли, не дал доказательств.
А кто-то ищет. А кто ищет, тот всегда находит. Я, например, к существованию Бога пришла, только занявшись наукой, которую современная церковь как раз гнобит.
И тут на самом деле не так важно, насколько существенны и научны доказательства, которые нашел человек сам для себя. А важно то, что вера как раз пришла к нему этим путем, а не потому что "все так делают"
Это тоже верно. Но это понимаешь уже потом. Изначально пришла к религии путем размышлений, а уже потом поняла, что нужно именно верить. Потому что размышление - это из мира логики, которому не покоряется верхний мир. Но действительно верить - не так просто. И дано не всем.
Один человек когда-то сказал мне - в христианстве можно увидеть его темную сторону с манипуляциями и политикой, а можно - огромный пласт культуры и чего-то бОльшего, что никогда не подчинится никаким манипуляциям.
Но! Я считаю, что к этому нужно либо прийти самостоятельно, либо впитать с молоком матери. В любом случае, если нет искренности - нет и веры. Поэтому меня адски раздражают многие "религиозные", которые лишь фактически соблюдают каноны, не имея ничего в сердце. А.. вот еще - и которые клянут тех. кто думает не как они.
Ну,клянуть-то как раз уже не по-христиански совсем... :))) Мне не приходило в голову,что можно повернуть все вот так...IQ У меня,видать,совсем отсутствует,но Национальная академия наук в США для меня совершенно не авторитетна :))))))))