APA 6th Edition Uršič, M. (2006). Einstein on Religion and Science. Synthesis philosophica, 21 (2), 267-283. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/12421
MLA 8th Edition Uršič, Marko. "Einstein on Religion and Science." Synthesis philosophica, vol. 21, br. 2, 2006, str. 267-283. https://hrcak.srce.hr/12421. Citirano 21.07.2019.
Chicago 17th Edition Uršič, Marko. "Einstein on Religion and Science." Synthesis philosophica 21, br. 2 (2006): 267-283. https://hrcak.srce.hr/12421
Harvard Uršič, M. (2006). 'Einstein on Religion and Science', Synthesis philosophica, 21(2), str. 267-283. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/12421 (Datum pristupa: 21.07.2019.)
Vancouver Uršič M. Einstein on Religion and Science. Synthesis philosophica [Internet]. 2006 [pristupljeno 21.07.2019.];21(2):267-283. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/12421
IEEE M. Uršič, "Einstein on Religion and Science", Synthesis philosophica, vol.21, br. 2, str. 267-283, 2006. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/12421. [Citirano: 21.07.2019.]
Sažetak The main issue of this paper is the question what Einstein actually meant from the philosophical and/or theological point of view in his famous phrase God does not play dice. What is the ‘underlying’ concept of necessity in this phrase, and first of all: which God here does not play dice – theistic, deistic, pantheistic? Some other passages from Einstein’s informal writings and public speeches suggest that he was very close to pantheism, following Spinoza, whom he admired and appreciated mostly among philosophers. However, Spinoza’s pantheism implies determinism which was presumably not the main point of Einstein’s protest against ‘dicing God’ in quantum physics… So, is Einstein’s God nevertheless closer
to Newton’s Pantocrator as to Spinoza’s Deus sive natura? Maybe yes, but only in case if the ‘Universal Ruler’ does not punish, neither reward his creatures, ourselves, tiny human beings in the mighty and incredibly ‘well-tuned’ cosmos. The enigma of the famous phrase remains.