Ken,

"Actually, that isn't really what he was implying, he was implying that in his mind a scientific theory should have certain attributes, aspects that he associated with his concept of how reality worked. Yes that is a biased approach, and is not guaranteed to work, but it is more a description of something that he was looking for and would not be satisfied without, moreso than a claim about how reality had to be. It was a statement of a personal aesthetic, a search for something that when he found it, served him well, and when he did not, left him empty and unsatisfied. A double-edged sword, if you will. The rest of us are not incumbent to accept that interpretation of what physical theories should be, if we find others that serve our purposes better."

To be able to examine all perspectives from a neutral standpoint as you do is a great quality.You'd make an excellent science teacher as you are very level headed and honest about the interpretational side of physics.

"I think a fair way to classify it is a statement of a particular possibility. In philosophy, it is important to get all the ideas out on the table, and if they come from renowned thinkers, more's the better. But nothing is true by authority in either philosophy or physics-- they are just possibilities to ponder. You are right that no one should ever say "it must be true because Einstein said it". It is significant that Einstein himself said in his letter to Born "I, at any rate, am convinced that He does not throw dice." He is speaking for himself, about what he believes is the way reality works, but it is nothing but an opinion for consideration-- like all philosophy."

Yes i think this is probably the most painful aspect; that he was so brilliant. Its hard to feel comfortable disagreeing with a known genius, whom one respects tremendously.

" ....The issue of predetermination, and the issue of some inherent role for randomness, are just not the same thing at all."

Yes Predetermination frightens me because it means an ultimately closed finite system, and i would feel conned by nature. To me it seems like Determinism is the slippery slope to full blown Predetermination.

It would be preferrable (to me) to know that creativity is spontaeous and not some pre-programmed code executed at the beginning of the universe. I realise that preference is based on my experience of reality with daily life and seeing all the variety of what appear to be creative forces in the universe.