Some of the answers got cut off so here they are again:
Richard Dawkins’ Belief Scale Scoring Rubric
Strong Theist: I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists. De-facto Theist: I cannot know for certain but I strongly believe in God and I live my life on the assumption that he is there. Weak Theist: I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God. Pure Agnostic: God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable. Weak Atheist: I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical. De-facto Atheist: I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable and I live my life under the assumption that he is not there. Strong Atheist: I am 100% sure that there is no God.
None of these is quite right for me; they all depend on dicey interpretations. But I suppose I’d fall somewhere between 6 and 7.
(Also, I think the strongest atheist position shouldn’t be described as “100% certain”, whatever that means, but rather that the existence of God is logically impossible, i.e. the concept “God” implies a contradiction. I don’t think this is correct, but I know there are some atheists who’ve claimed to believe it).
None of these is quite right for me; they all depend on dicey interpretations. But I suppose I’d fall somewhere between 6 and 7.
(Also, I think the strongest atheist position shouldn’t be described as “100% certain”, whatever that means, but rather that the existence of God is logically impossible, i.e. the concept “God” implies a contradiction. I don’t think this is correct, but I know there are some atheists who’ve claimed to believe it).
Funny, I went with 7 because of our earlier discussion about “knowing” that a teapot doesn’t orbit Jupiter.
Funny, I went with 7 because of our earlier discussion about “knowing” that a teapot doesn’t orbit Jupiter.
Yes, I think that’s one plausible answer, but it depends on how one understands “100% certain”. Some may take that to mean the sort of certainty that 1+1=2, which is a different order of certainty entirely.
To put it another way: in one way of looking at it, I am 100% certain that if I bought a lottery ticket I would not win. That is, my chance of winning is very much less than 1%, so my belief rounds to 100%. But that’s not to say I couldn’t in fact win.
(This is sort of the way I think of God, FWIW, only with a VERY big lottery).
There’s another sense of 100% certain in that I am 100% certain that I couldn’t jump to the Moon. It’s not that there’s some vanishingly small chance I could do it, it’s that it’s literally, physically impossible. Or that I could trisect the angle with compass and straight edge: that’s literally, logically impossible.
So the same option 7 may end up meaning very different things to different people. And that strikes me as confused.
I went with 7, haven’t been proven wriong so far but that’s from personal observation and study. If anyone can answer the statement , “show me god” with empirical evidence then I’ll be forced to change my opinion.
My beliefs, Gods exist where ever we humans invent them or find then useful, don’t fit on the scale.
Wouldn’t that technically be a 1?
I don’t think so.
1. Strong Theist: I do not question the existence of God, the priestess I worship is a female, Sudari the Celestial Barmaid. (and don’t call her Suds unless you are an iniate, )
I find myself intrigued by the tone of the discussion here. I would suppose someone who felt themselves to be strongly theistic would be proud of choosing #1 and vociferously proclaim the nobility/morality of that choice, and yet the people here, who have dedicated much time and intellectual effort to examining and testing the theory that there is not and can not be a god are somewhat cautious about how we embrace that claim. No one has yet whole-heartedly proclaimed themselves a #7 and promoted that choice as one which reflects special virtue and integrity. While that could very likely be seen as a sign of weakness, a lack of surety, by a person trained to think in a religious fashion, embracing and recognizing the element of doubt in all things is the very essence of what appeals to me about the secular viewpoint.
)
