Home Discussion Forum Why Albert Einstein had said " Science without Religion is Lame and...

Why Albert Einstein had said " Science without Religion is Lame and Religion without Science is Blind ?

please explain me it in most simple manner
why albert einstein said this,what he means to say


  1. My opinion is that he is trying to say that Science without God is paralyzed, unfruitful, limp and unable to stand on its own. Wisdom needs Knowledge, and knowledge needs wisdom.

  2. By lame, he meant immobile because of restriction (not being able to be totally open). And by blind he meant ignorant; a religious person ought not dismiss what science can explain.

  3. As a scientist Albert Einstein often said that he wanted “to know the thoughts of God.”
    Pope John Paul II said that science was good in that it takes the mythology out of religion.
    “Science doesn’t disprove God, science helps us to understand God.”
    Mr. Hermes – my 7th grade science teacher

  4. Science should try to answer the questions raised by religion and religion should try to answer the questions raised by science.

  5. einstein said, many times, he did not believe in a “personal god”
    he had almost (but not exactly) a pantheist view of the universe.
    he said “I believe in Spinoza’s God…”

  6. He was trying to characterize the nature of investigation of the unknown. If you cannot imagine anything beyond the observed (religion), you cannot discover, but it you do not temper your imagination by testing it against reality (science), you are lost.

  7. He understood that to be be a good scientist you have to have an open mind to all possibilities…
    A.C. Clarke (Scientist & Writer) – “My GOD, it’s Full of Stars”…
    My GOD = The Universe (It created all of us).

  8. You need to understand this in the framework that he did not believe that it was possible a personal god could exist. He once said he believed in Spinoza’s god, which is not a theos any Western Christian, Jew or Muslim could posit as a god or interpret as a god. His god was nature itself and not an anthropomorphic nature.
    I am also a strict atheist and I agree with him on this and have struggled with how to bring the positive by products of religion into society without the superstition like the belief in gods and prayers, magic or demons.
    Science without religion is science without the poetic framework we humans seem to find so very powerful and very important to daily life. Religions, all of them, can be thought of poetic frameworks of symbols, associations, and ideas that we use to interpret our reality and to share those interpretations. That shared meaning and shared identity gives the natural awe of science a framework in which it can be emotionally understood.
    The flip side of this is that a poetic set of associations without grounding in reality, like all the world religions basically use, is essentially intuition allowed to run wild. Such a religion will engage in egregiously immoral and irrational decisions because it cannot learn from its mistakes because it cannot make mistakes.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here