Albert Einstein, one of the greatest scientists of the twentieth century, received a letter from Phyllis Wright in 1936. In this letter, Phyllis asks Einstein whether or not scientists pray. In his response, Einstein's purpose was not only to answer Phyllis' question, but he wanted to express to the public that everyone has a belief in the unknown, whether it be religion or scientific knowledge. Einstein uses words which mirror those used in religion and a neutral diction, and he structures his letter in a way that makes the reader have to think about the answer for themselves in order to achieve his purpose effectively…
Albert Einstein considered the greatest scientist of the 20th century hopes to accurately respond to Phyllis’s letter that asked him whether scientists prayed and if they did what did they pray about. Einstein’s response is rhetorically accurate in the fact that he lets Phyllis know the answer to her question in an understandable manner and is not abrupt. Einstein’s audience is a sixth-grade student so he answered his question by saying “no” in a kind way. The writer Einstein uses pathos and logos to allow his point to clearly shine; he also uses simplistic diction to recreate his audiences understanding.…
In a response to sixth-grader Phyllis Wright’s inquiry about prayers in scientists’ lives, Albert Einstein employs rhetorical appeals to character and reason in order to encourage thought from her but ultimately answers her question insufficiently. Since it is already understood that Einstein is the writer, he does not need to establish his credibility. However, he does take advantage his reputation to make broad, encompassing statements about scientists that few others could. For example, an amateur scientist would only be able to represent himself, but Einstein can accurately portray the scientific community by using first person pronouns like “our” and “we” and making generalizing statements about “everyone who is involved in science.” Not…
Eventhough, science provided to our society enormous knowledge about the universe and the possibilities how to use matter and energy, which lead to the mass production of superhuman technology, science has not been always appreciated by the humans. Religious communities abused the scientific individuals and theories throughout the European modern history. Ideas, that are known to be fact nowadays, like heliocentrism, dissemination of the diseases by germs, or the shape of the Earth were rejected by the society, because of the massive power of the Church. Hence, the religious impact on the educational system in the 20th century, after the breakthroughs of Newton or Einstein, portrays the humanity as a stubborn, ignorant, and intolerant civilization. The fact, that there is a countless number of churches in the United States, but the budget for NASA decreases almost every year, proves that our society is not ready to get on a higher and more intelligent level. Therefore, I suggest that our society finally acknowledges the most famous quote from Nietzsche: “God is…
As scientists, or natural philosophers, made new discoveries and theories they often dedicated them to the church, whether it was literal dedication or whether the finding supported the church. Even though they meant to support the church, many of those who did not understand the findings rejected them, but the fact that the common man could not always understand what an astronomer had investigated does not mean that it should be rejected. For the beauty and usefulness of the discoveries support what the common man knows and understands which is that God is God. (Doc. 2) The pressure that came from being rejected pushed scientists to search for acceptance in many cases for fear of being outcast, and there was no greater place to search for acceptance than from the church. Nicolaus Copernicus, Polish priest and astronomer, dedicated his works to Pope Paul III stating how he was not one to shrink from another’s criticism and that his findings contribute to the well being of the Church. (Doc. 1) Copernicus was a man of the church as well, making his words to the Pope weighted, however. Natural philosophers used the church as evidence in their findings as well. Once atoms and the structure of the world were discovered, it was too mind-blowing to not believe that all this perfect complexity was not brought together by an all-powerful being. But seeing that most men during this time were in some way affiliated with the church, it was very common for men to make these sorts of assumptions. (Doc. 8) Religion thus gave scientists a reason for discovery and evidence supporting discoveries.…
In his Letter to Grand Duchess Christiana, Galileo made an attempt to explain his discoveries and defended that they do not discredit the Church or religion. He insisted that science and religion could coexist. He explained how and why. He expressed his personal opinion on the reasons why certain people did not believe him and his discoveries. Galileo expressed confidence in his knowledge, sarcasm in some regards, and the letter’s overall tone seemed to upset many.…
Attention Getter: The great quarrel between science and religion has been in full swing since their beginning and has since taken a twist into controversy. Science wants to see the facts while religion bases everything on their belief in the Bible. These statements still hold truth today.…
In a letter that Albert Einstein writes, he uses ethos and logos to effectively answer Phyllis Wright’s question on whether scientists pray. In order to achieve this, Einstein first utilizes ethos to give credibility to the answer. He explicitly states that the response is his own opinion by saying “my answer” in the first sentence. This man is considered to be the greatest scientist of the twentieth century and if it is his answer, Wright will be convinced with his response. Also, Wright specifically wrote to him and so when he responds personally, Wright will trust the response because she respects Einstein enough to write to him. Additionally, Einstein successfully employs logos to assist in his purpose to answer the question. For example,…
Still during the sixteenth and seventeenth century, religious and the Church played a great role in the ways of people. Till the time of the Scientific Revolution, many things were not questioned, but once scientists began to question the traditional beliefs, many people of the church were outraged and spoke openly against it. Even people like Copernicus, who was the great contributor to the heliocentric idea, denied himself and submitted to the church even dedicating a part of his book to Pope III which showed his fear and actions in pleasing the pope to avoid condemnation. (doc. 1) His situation greatly exemplified how the Scientific Revolution although was growing but many times stunted because of fear from the disapproval from the Church. Italian monk Giovanni Ciampoli also expressed his disapproval in a letter to Galileo stating with much urgency that the nature of the world should just be left alone for the Scripture to explain it and that man should not go about their ways to reason why. (doc. 3) Similar to Copernicus, Walter Charleton a English doctor and natural philosopher who studied the balance of science and religious. He makes it clear that science is only possible with religion. Although he does not completely push the idea of scientific studies, he does believe it is only possible with the power of God. (doc. 8) The conclusion as you interpret out of Charleton is that no matter what man upholds through science or ideas…
Imagine if you got lost in a town, you would use a GPS to help you. But if Einstein never found out Relativity, then you would have a hard time finding your destination. Einstein’s Relativity changed the world because his equations and theories help make nuclear power plants and the GPS. Relativity is not only used in daily life, but also used extensively by aero-space-scientists. For example, The Precession of Mercury’s orbit can only be accurately predicted by Einstein’s Relativity and not the Newton’s law (General Relativity). Einstein’s Relativity is not only a more accurate way to describe the physical world than Newton’s law, but also have a daily impact on life.…
Modern Scientific Picture: Scientists and educated men feel the Christian attitude towards the world and human existence is inappropriate. While science has both robbed us of any purpose that we had before, it has also furnished us with enormously greater power to achieve these purposes.…
The idea of scientists and lawyers/ judges using the method of gaining enough evidence before believing in a claim was a good example provided when explaining one of the alternative positions. Which was the theory of waiting until sufficient evidence is provided to support a certain claim? Although this helps for scientists and judges it does not help for the rest of us because for our understanding this method is out of place. James explains this by mentioning that we are not truth seekers and we cannot get certain topics out of the way, the way a scientist of a lawyer can. Examples such as this one help explain the main thesis and does not reflect any sort of defects within the essay which results in the essay being satisfactory as well as agreeable. Many other alternative positions mentioned in this essay were also agreeable and satisfactory. The definitions, as well as the concepts presented in this essay, also provided a better understanding of the thesis. By connecting the definitions to construct the concepts clearly. Although he provides a sufficient amount of examples and positions for his main argument, James did not provide clear opposing arguments in his essay. His essay explained the examples and the points provided to enhance his argument but did not provide enough opposing arguments to support the claim. There was not enough emphasis on the opposing arguments. James argument is sound as well as satisfactory because it helps understand the notion behind understanding the need to believe in certain topics such as religion without sufficient evidence. In other words, using our passions to help understand the idea of God’s existence opposed from our reasons. James provides strong evidence to support his claim that the idea of God’s existence is rational instead of irrational because of the idea of…
Albert Einstein states in the letter “everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe” By saying this he gives off the idea that he has became open to the opinion of others, without clearly stating that he believes either way. He isn’t trying to disprove a religious spirit exists, but solely trying to show a difference between religious spirit and science.…
Science verses Religion has been an ongoing debate all over the world for centuries. Depending on who one talks to about these topic will depend on the passion and beliefs one has. As we saw in the movie Angels and Demons all the major characters such as Robert Langdon, Camerlengo McKenna and the former pope had their own strong feelings and beliefs. Certain questions have been raised about these two topics that I will be elaborating on later in this essay such as, Is there room in the world for both, Can one render the other obsolete, and would I rather live in a world without science or religion? I find all these questions very interesting and interaging, just like the movie Angels and Demons.…
He argues that he has not put forth the argument to prove that if atheism were true, there would be something objectively wrong with what a psychopath does.…