Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bernardo de La Paz

(60,320 posts)
15. No, and no to your disruptive red herring.
Mon Jan 6, 2014, 04:47 PM
Jan 2014

You wrote:

If imagination > knowledge, is then, religion > science? Might make a few heads explode around here.


Your post misses Einstein's point.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand." ― Albert Einstein


Einstein was talking about scientific imagination and scientific knowledge, which should be expected since he is a scientist and does not mention religion in the quote.

You introduced a red herring by introducing religion. So I reversed the expectation that your post engendered and posted as I did. Here is a fuller quote which shows the context, to make clear (should be clear enough) that it was nothing about religion:

I believe in intuition and inspiration. … At times I feel certain I am right while not knowing the reason. When the eclipse of 1919 confirmed my intuition, I was not in the least surprised. In fact I would have been astonished had it turned out otherwise. Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world, stimulating progress, giving birth to evolution. It is, strictly speaking, a real factor in scientific research.


Yes, scientific imagination trumps religious "knowledge", which is only faith and voices and is not knowledge at all.

No, religious imagination does not trump scientific knowledge. Religious imagination imagines that man was created magically 6000 years ago. Religious imagination holds women in subjegation and oppression -- not all religious imagination, just most of it.

Scientific imagination subjects itself to the testing and invites being disproved. If it is possible to disprove a theory or show how an observation was mistaken, then it should be done. Religious imagination permits no questioning, wraps itself in robes, and demands respect where little or none is due.

Things that religionists believe such as talking snakes, 76 virgins for each male warrior in heaven, reincarnation, walking on water, and the morality of sacrificing children are myths. Science is far better than religion. Nobody launched crusades on Rome because they believed in Greek earth-centric astronomy. People are not beating up gays around the world because of some scientific belief. The 8 year old girl in Afghanistan sent with a suicide vest by her Taliban brother was sent for religious bigotry, not by science.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

He resigned from the Prussian Academy of Science in 1933 after Hitler came to power jakeXT Jan 2014 #1
and he was Jewish. NYtoBush-Drop Dead Jan 2014 #18
If imagination > knowledge, is then, religion > science? Festivito Jan 2014 #2
No. Logical fallacies are run-of-the-mill here, just like what you wrote. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jan 2014 #4
How is it a fallacy? Festivito Jan 2014 #5
No. Scientific imagination is more powerful than religious "knowledge". Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #9
But yes for religious imagination over scientific knowledge then? Festivito Jan 2014 #11
No, and no to your disruptive red herring. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #15
Immagination is the source of greater knowledge(NT) The Wizard Jan 2014 #27
Yes, imagination too. That was the point of Einstein's quote. nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #31
disruptive?? demwing Jan 2014 #28
Religion is disruptive. It doesn't appreciate being questioned. It has nothing to do with the OP. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #30
Science is rational demwing Jan 2014 #39
I think the post boils down to the idea that religion has nothing to do with imagination. Festivito Jan 2014 #42
No. It boils down to the OP has nothing to do with religion. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #47
You're misstating the actual concept Orrex Jan 2014 #12
The "actual concept" is what Einstein stated. And it was the OP that stated that, not me. Festivito Jan 2014 #14
If you think Einstein meant religion>science, then show your source Orrex Jan 2014 #17
I posed it as a question, not as a fact. Festivito Jan 2014 #37
Well, that's disingenuous of you Orrex Jan 2014 #38
Wrong. I like the OP quote. eom. Festivito Jan 2014 #44
No. You miss the concept by missing the boat. You bring the real smoke screen. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #19
The most imaginative religion never cured anything ... GeorgeGist Jan 2014 #34
Tell that to Pasteur. n/t Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #41
No. You tell us how Pasteur relates to religion curing anything (which it does not). nt Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #49
If you're waiting for some description of Pasteur's religion Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #50
Every bit of motivation from religion for "healers" can be done without religion. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #55
Are you concerned that religion engenders bigotry and tribalism? Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #56
Yes, and many other nasty things. Of course it is not the only source but is a huge source. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #58
If you don't like bigotry and tribalism then don't be a source of them. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2014 #59
Festivito introduced religion into this discussion, needlessly. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #60
Religion has to do with belief. truedelphi Jan 2014 #13
.. and what that belief, that faith can do for imagination. Festivito Jan 2014 #22
No. Imagination most usefully works by going outside of beliefs & old backgrounds. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #32
When 2+2=5, can faith in math be relative? eom. Festivito Jan 2014 #45
That post is nonsensical. Bernardo de La Paz Jan 2014 #46
Einsteins theory of relativity is flawed. He realized it. Festivito Jan 2014 #48
I hope I'll always know when to walk away. hunter Jan 2014 #3
He left because of Hitler and Progressive dog Jan 2014 #6
He Was In The U.S. And Did Not Return Because Of Hitler, But He Was Repulsed At The Glee He Saw... WillyT Jan 2014 #7
You had him leaving in WW1, you do know that Progressive dog Jan 2014 #8
I May Have Got The Timeline Screwed Up (Remembering From A Great Documentary On Him, But... WillyT Jan 2014 #10
So shouldn't you edit your OP? muriel_volestrangler Jan 2014 #29
Was it the woo wars? Kaleva Jan 2014 #16
so it had nothing to do with Hitler getting power and him being Jewish ? JI7 Jan 2014 #20
See Post #10... WillyT Jan 2014 #23
didn't Einstein support the US developing weapons ? JI7 Jan 2014 #21
Not Really... But... WillyT Jan 2014 #24
so in the midst of WWII he was supportive of it an understood the threat JI7 Jan 2014 #25
I'm afraid I think this is completely wrong in just about all particulars Donald Ian Rankin Jan 2014 #26
LOL !!! WillyT Jan 2014 #33
About Einstein: truedelphi Jan 2014 #35
Touche, I admit. Donald Ian Rankin Jan 2014 #36
because he was a Jew? nt arely staircase Jan 2014 #40
He was owed beer and travel expenses. Yet they did not want to pay up. Glassunion Jan 2014 #43
I miss RandomThoughts' word salads. LAGC Jan 2014 #53
You can't solve problems without a new model. Manifestor_of_Light Jan 2014 #51
this caused an enormous crisis of conscience in the US scientific world after Trinity and WWII MisterP Jan 2014 #52
So he left due to the development of more efficient killing machines... Omnith Jan 2014 #54
I really can't imagine why a Jew might have chosen to leave Berlin in 1933.... LeftishBrit Jan 2014 #57
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A Timely Repost: Do You K...»Reply #15