. Albert Einstein, Out of My Later Years (reprint ed., 1950; Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1973), p. 24.

. This is consistent with Immanuel Kant's division of science and religion, in which the domain of science is confined to the phenomenal realm and religion to man's moral life.

. Einstein, p. 22.

. Albert Einstein, Cosmic Religion (New York: Covici‐Friede, 1931), p. 48. Einstein avoids using the term “theology” because of its traditional overtones. However, the direction in which he proceeds is clearly “theological” in that it defends a particular understanding of the nature of God. The deep influence of Benedictus de Spinoza is evident in Einstein's treatment.

. Ibid., p. 53.

. For an excellent treatment of Einstein's epistemology see Gerald Holton, “Constructing a Theory: Einstein's Model.” American Scholar 48 (1979): 309–40.

. Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, trans. Sonja Bargmann (New York: Dell Publishing Co., 1973), p. 255.

. Galileo Galilei, “Dialog on the Great World Systems,” in The Achievement of Galileo, ed. James Brophy and Henry Paolucci (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1962), p. 74.

. Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, pp. 57–58.

. Hans Reichenbach, “The Philosophical Significance of the Theory of Relativity,” in Albert Einstein: Philosopher‐Scientist, ed. Paul Arthur Schilpp (Evanston, Ill.: Library of Living Philosophers, 1949), p. 303.

. Albert Einstein, The Born‐Einstein Letters: Correspondence between Albert Einstein and Max and Hedwig Born from 1916 to 1955, trans. Irene Born (New York: Walker & Co., 1971), p. 82.

. Ibid., p. 27.

. Einstein, Cosmic Religion, p. 27.

. Born, p. 91.

. Gerald Holton, Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 110.

. Albert Einstein, “Autobiographical Notes,” in Albert Einstein: Philosopher‐Scientist (n. 10 above), p. 5.

. Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post‐Critical Philosophy (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), p. 300.

. Einstein, “Autobiographical Notes,” p. 21.

. For a straightforward account of Alfred North Whitehead's analysis of the subject‐object problem see Ivor Leclerc, Whitehead's Metaphysics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1958), pp. 115–23.