Notes

1. . Albert Einstein, “Credo,” in Living Philosophies: A Series of Intimate Credos, ed. Henry Goddard Leach (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1931), p. 3.
2. . In the twelfth century Joachim of Fiore used the Christian symbols of the trinity to develop a speculative doctrine of history and eschatology. See the critical discussion in Eric Voeglin, The New Science of Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952). Concerning gnosticism and the nonrecognition of reality as a matter of principle see pp. 167–73. See also Paul Tillich, The Future of Religions (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), pp. 66–77.
3. . Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov, trans. Constance Garnett (New York: Modern Library, 1950), p. 267.
4. . Henry Allen, “The Lure of Our Many Cults,” Washington Post (November 26, 1978), p.C‐1.
5. . Homer Iliad 24. 315.
6. . See H. S. Thayer, ed., Newton's Philosophy of Nature (New York: Hafner Publishing Co., 1953), chap. 3. Jeremy Bernstein states that Isaac Newton offered a theological resolution to the problems of the distinguishability of rest and motion and of an absolute frame of reference for his theory of mechanics. See Bernstein's Einstein (New York: Penguin Books, 1978), pp. 40–41 and chap. 3. See also Max Jammer, Concepts of Space (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957); foreword by Einstein. See pp. 96–99, 112–14 on Newton.
7. . Thomas Langan, The Meaning of Heidegger: A Critical Study of Existentialist Phenomenology (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961), pp. 72–80.
8. . Immanuel Kant, The Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1965), p. Bxix. Cf. pp. B246, B247, B269.
9. . Dostoyevsky, p. 254.
10. . Friedrich Nietzsche, “Thus Spake Zarathustra,” in The Portable Nietzsche, ed. Walter Kaufmann (New York: Viking Press, 1965), pp. 375–79.
11. . Gabriel Langfeldt, Albert Schweitzer: A Study of His Philosophy of Life (New York: George Braziller, 1960), pp. 13–14, 29–50, 60, 94; Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (New York: Macmillan Co., 1948), chap. 19.
12. . Paul Tillich, The Courage to Be (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1952), pp. 185, 182–90, and Systematic Theology, 3 vols. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), 3:126.
13. . Albert Einstein, Out of My Later Years (Totowa, N.J.: Littlefield, Adams & Co., 1967), pp. 30–31.
14. . Ibid.
15. . Ibid.
16. . Einstein, “Credo,” pp. 6–7.
17. . Einstein, Out of My Later Years, p. 29.
18. . Max Planck, Where Is Science Going? (London: Allen & Unwin, 1933), p. 13. This book contains a preface by Einstein and also “A Socratic Dialogue” involving James Murphy, Einstein, and Planck. Valuable discussion of causality and metaphysics.
19. . Albert Einstein, “Reply to Criticisms,” in Albert Einstein: Philosopher‐Scientist, ed. Paul Arthur Schilpp (Evanston, Ill.: Library of Living Philosophers, 1949), p. 673.
20. . Ibid.
21. . Ibid., p. 674.
22. . Ibid., pp. 678–79.
23. . Kant, p. B18.
24. . Kant's critical idealism and his a priori forms, categories, and propositions are criticized and largely rejected by modern physics, psychology, logic, and relativity theory. See a brief discussion in Jammer (n. 6 above), p. 137; cf. pp. 129–44.
25. . Einstein, “Reply to Criticisms,” p. 678.
26. . “The belief in an external world independent of the perceiving subject is the basis of all natural science. Since, however, sense perception only gives information of this external world or of ‘physical reality’ indirectly, we can only grasp the latter by speculative means. It follows from this that our notions of physical reality can never be final. We must always be ready to change these notions that is to say, the axiomatic sub‐structure of physics‐in order to do justice to perceived facts in the most logically perfect way. Actually a glance at the development of physics shows that it has undergone far‐reaching changes in the course of time” (Albert Einstein, The World As I See It [New York: Covici‐Friede, 1934], p. 60).
27. . Einstein was confronted with “two principles: (1) the principle of relativity for Galilean frames of reference and (2) the principle of the absolute finite velocity of light in vacuo. Einstein noted that these two principles contradict each other…. He proceeded… to note what presupposition makes the two principles contradict each other. He discovered that it is the doctrine of the addition and subtraction of velocities which rests upon the principle that time is absolute. Nothing remained but to reject the latter principle and regard time as relative. Thus a contradiction in traditional electromagnetic theory drove Einstein to the discovery of the principle of the relativity of simultaneity. This is the essential contribution of the special theory of relativity…. It is to be noted that in both cases no new evidence is introduced and no experiments are performed. The conclusions owe their validity solely to logic and traditional evidence. They are the necessary consequences of established ideas” (F. S. C. Northrop, Science and First Principles [New York: Macmillan Co., 1931], pp. 68–69).
28. . F. S. C. Northrop, The Meeting of East and West (New York: Macmillan Co., 1946), pp. 453, 442–54, 468–81, 493. Einstein has offered strong praise for Northrop's interpretation of Einstein's philosophy of science: “The essays by Lenzen and Northrop both aim to treat my occasional utterances of epistemological content systematically…. Northrop uses these utterances as point of departure for a comparative critique of the major epistemological systems. I see in this critique a masterpiece of unbiased thinking and concise discussion, which nowhere permits itself to be diverted from the essential” (Einstein, “Reply to Criticisms,” p. 683).
29. . Einstein, “Reply to Criticisms,” pp. 679–80.
30. . “Science is the attempt to make the chaotic diversity of our sense experience correspond to a logically uniform system of thought. In this system single experiences must be correlated with the theoretic structure in such a way that the resulting coordination is complete and convincing” (Northrop, Meeting of East and West, p. 443).
31. . Langan (n. 7 above), pp. 72–80.
32. . Kant (n. 8 above), pp. B472 and B586.
33. . Einstein, “Credo,” p. 3.
34. . Tillich (n. 12 above), pp. 163–67, 170–72, 174–76, 181, 185, 187.
35. . Planck (n. 18 above), pp. 81, 128–30, 203.
36. . Benedictus de Spinoza, Chief Works, trans. R. H. M. Elwes (New York: Dover Publications, 1955) (Ethics, pt. 1, propositions 15–17).
37. . Friedrich Schleiermacher, On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1958), pp. 93–101.
38. . PeterHomans, “Transference and Transcendence: Freud and Tillich on the Nature of Personal Relatedness,” Journal of Religion  46 (January 1966): 153–60. See Paul Tillich's “Rejoinder,” ibid., p. 195.
39. . Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality (New York: Macmillan Co., 1929), p. 54.
40. . William R. Jones, Is God a White Racist?: A Preamble to Black Theology (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press, 1973), pp. 10–24, 114–15, 142, 171–72.
41. . Albert Einstein, Cosmic Religion: With Other Opinions and Aphorisms (New York: Covici‐Friede, 1931), pp. 48–51, 98.