Talk:Albert Einstein

Deism/Agnosticism not Atheism/pantheism

The intro to this page is very misleading. Einstein not rejected both the idea and the label of atheism as well as pantheism in this quote:

From Einstein and Religion, by Max Jammer "Your question [about God] is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. "

Much of this confusion comes from Dawkin's God Delusion which cherry picks quotes where Einstein criticizes the idea of a personal god but never mentions any of the quotes where he rejects atheism and criticizes anti-theists. Unfortunately this has lead to a lot of mislabeling for the sake of supporting ones own views rather than what he actually believed. Walter Issacson wrote a biography called "Einstein his Life and Universe" states that he was more of a deist and agnostic. I recommend watching this short video of Issacson explaining his beliefs in detail. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7r57oCT2cU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ekhawaja (talk • contribs) 13:59, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

In any case, Einstein's opinions on this point are just as important as those of the first person you meet in the street. Einstein's scientific work did not authorise him to speak on non-scientific points. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.0.17.8 (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

It's interesting, but easy to get wrong. Like Isaac Newton, Einstein respected the Creator. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk)

This seems like a contradiction

How could Einstein have Swiss citizenship from 1901-1955 yet be listed as stateless from 1933-1940? 108.207.32.91 (talk) 02:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

It is a contradiction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.166.89.116 (talk) 16:14, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• I have removed the invalid part. Einstein was still a Swiss citizen from 1933 to 1940; he just did not have the other ones as well, having renounced them.

Nutster (talk) 14:06, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Early work

Some of Einstein's early work can be seen in his article "On the investigation of the state of the ether in a magnetic field", of 1894 or 1895. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.54.41.158 (talk) 12:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

the ridiculous myth that Einstein failed mathematics in basic school

I do not know the origin of this myth. I suspect that it is a lie repeated again and again by those motivational trainers often hired by big companies to indoctrinate their sales personnel and in self-enhancement books.

This myth seems to be very popular in Mexico.

Do you feel the necessity to add a section about unfounded and ridiculous myths?

That could add a touch of humor to the article, but is irrelevant to the real biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.178.77.57 (talk) 07:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

The article contains this sentence: "Contrary to popular suggestions that he had struggled with early speech difficulties, the Albert Einstein Archives indicate he excelled at the first school that he attended." That's probably enough. Any further exposition about the "failed math" story and other myths might fit in the article Albert Einstein in popular culture. --MelanieN (talk) 18:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

 Not done: Contains no source, could this IP addressed visitor just trying to make a point? Cheers!-- Allied Rangoon‧talk 22:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

German-born vs. German-Jewish born

I'm pretty amused that I was reverted here. I don't understand why German-born would be better than German-Jewish born, which was backlinked to the German-Jew article, where Einstein is prominently featured as a famous example.

The first point is obviously that there is a lot of undue emphasis on his first nationality. I have no idea why this is relevant in any biography. It's more relevant what his last nationality was.

The second point is, of course this is a special case, because he left Nazi Europe and their Anti-Semite policies. It's thus most relevant to mention his ethnicity rather than nationality, German-Jew, to clarify the case right in the brginning.

Third point, of course nowadays there is a great sympathy towards Einstein, but I'm not sure whether Einstein himself would hsve been happy with suvh an intro. I sense a deep unneutral nationalistic agenda behind this wording.

Fourth point, there are many reliable sources which describe him as German-Jew, which hence can't be factually worse than the present version. I hereby reject the provided rev edit summary in its entirety and demsnd a re-revert.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I personally don't care whether it should be German-born or German-Jewish born, but please note that—here on Wikipedia—demands and sensing deep unneutral nationalistic agendas tend to bring you nowhere—fast. - DVdm (talk) 12:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Because "German" is a nationality, while "Jewish" is an ethnicity. Per WP:BIO, articles don't normally mention the subjects ethnicity, especially in the lead. JOJ ^Hutton 12:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I didn't intend to sound some kind of rude. My apologies. MOS:BIO is clearly stating, "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability." This supports my 2nd point directly. Also, "Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability." doesn't support the addition of earlier nationalities as he's not some sportsman, where nationalities might be indeed relevant in case of medals.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

@ThaThin, please understand that there have been years' worth of discussion here, about how to describe Einstein's nationality in the lead. YEARS. The current description of him ("German-born") is the result of extensive discussion and strong consensus. It meets Wikipedia policy and style, and it has been stable for years. You have changed it twice. Don't change it again, unless you get consensus here first. --MelanieN (talk) 15:33, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I checked the archive til 2008 or so. Going by the archive people have regularly criticized the nationality part. There was no serious discussion on the issue and all sides were completely unaware of actual manual of style as demonstrated by me earlier. I'm no pretty convinced that there is no real interest to go the wikipedia ways. Instead we see a pathetic and not less obvious attempt to "re-germanize" Einstein who took his American citizenship with him to grave. And the cleansing of his Jewish identity in the lead sentence is completely crazy. He ran away because of this shit only. Macabre, disrespectful and disgusting. I write emotionally, because I have great respect for this Jewish man.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 18:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

He might have run away from this shit even without that ethnicity. But our speculations are off-topic here—see our wp:talk page guidelines. - DVdm (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

First see MOS please then tell others what to do.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 18:55, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

MOS, as you quoted it above, states "Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability." (my bolding) This seems like a pretty clear statement NOT to mention his ethnicity in the opening sentence; the fact that he was of Jewish ethnicity is not one of the reasons he is so notable. He would have been equally notable if he had been of any other extraction. Thus, we do not include it, per MOS. --MelanieN (talk) 19:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

^{(edit conflict)}The consensus seems to be that the ethnicity is not relevant to this particular subject's notability, so according to MOS:BIO it should not be emphasised. First see wp:consensus before telling others what to do. - DVdm (talk) 19:11, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

P.S. to ThaThin: If you check any random dozen articles from Category:Jewish physicists or Category:Jewish scientists, I think you will find that their Jewishness is overwhelmingly NOT mentioned in the lead sentence. The typical lead sentence reads "(Subject) is a (nationality) (profession)..." --MelanieN (talk) 19:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

His actual last citizenship was Swiss-American. It's against MOS to use earlier citizenships.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 19:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I quick checked some of them. Found plenty of "Jews". Unnecessary exercise.--ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 19:31, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

In the lead sentence? I doubt it. I just randomly checked a dozen entries from the category "Jewish physicists". One said the subject was French from a Polish-Jewish family. The other eleven did not mention "Jewish" in the lead. --MelanieN (talk) 00:45, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

German-born is fine. There seems to be an obsessive need in some ethno-nationalist quarters to "claim" famous people as Jewish. AntiqueReader (talk) 21:48, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Well, let's not question the motives of other editors. This is not a case of "claiming" him as Jewish; he WAS from a Jewish family, and it says so in the text of the article. The issue here is an attempt to EMPHASIZE that aspect of him by putting it into the lead sentence. --MelanieN (talk) 01:36, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Agree. Let's drop. - DVdm (talk) 05:59, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

He was Jew first. Nazis wanted his head. --ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You need to get consensus or walk away from the article. Start an RfC, use dispute resolution or whatever, but do not try to short-circuit due process because it will cause conflict and disruption. Sean.hoyland - talk 08:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Conflict and disruption is caused by semi-literate Pro-Germans like you who can't follow MOS

BIO. "walk away" LOL --ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 08:33, 15 May 2014 (UTC)