Where do you sit on the Dawkins belief scale?

[Tank]

In The God Delusion Richard Dawkins presents a scale of belief in god, it has often been refered to as the "Dawkins Scale".

1. Strong theist. 100 percent possibility of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, 'I do not believe, I know.'
2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. 'I cannot know for certain, but I
   strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there
3. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism.
   'I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.'
4. Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. 'God's existence and non-existence are
   exactly equiprobable.'
5. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism.
   'I don't know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be sceptical.'
6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. 'I cannot know for certain but I think God
   is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.'
7. Strong atheist. 'I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung 'knows' there is one.'

Where do you sit on this scale?

[Stevil]

I'm incredibly close to being a 7. Problem is it is hard to say there is no god for sure, when there is no clear definition of what a god is.

[Awolf26]

I am a clear and strident 6. Many of my "agnostic" friends say that if I am not a 7, then I'm not an atheist. "You have to be 100% certain", they say. No rational scientific thinker is going to be 100% certain about anything. I think they just don't want to be "labeled" an atheist. Oh agnostics  

"The responsible scientist, that is, respects the fact that she is not absolutely certain, and is thus ready to be proved wrong. Indeed, any responsible scientist can tell you what evidence would cause her to abandon her hypothesis; whereas it is the rare religious believer indeed who is able to do this." - Troy Jollimore

[Tank]

I'm incredibly close to being a 7. Problem is it is hard to say there is no god for sure, when there is no clear definition of what a god is.

Well I used to say I was a 6 in my head and a 7 in my heart.

[Tank]

I am a clear and strident 6. Many of my "agnostic" friends say that if I am not a 7, then I'm not an atheist. "You have to be 100% certain", they say. No rational scientific thinker is going to be 100% certain about anything. I think they just don't want to be "labeled" an atheist. Oh agnostics  

"The responsible scientist, that is, respects the fact that she is not absolutely certain, and is thus ready to be proved wrong. Indeed, any responsible scientist can tell you what evidence would cause her to abandon her hypothesis; whereas it is the rare religious believer indeed who is able to do this." - Troy Jollimore

Agreed. I must say I'm enjoying your posts Awolf26.

[Awolf26]

Agreed. I must say I'm enjoying your posts Awolf26.

Thanks!

[OldGit]

For me, when improbability gets to a certain point it is equivalent to definite nonexistence.  I am happy to state that Russel's teapot is definitely not up there - philosophers and logicians say it just might be, but we all know it's not.  For me, it's the same with god. Thus I can with honesty tick 7 and not 6.

[Sweetdeath]

I guess I am a 6, only because my pet rat might be God. XD

But seriously.. I'm 99.9% certain. And I do live by "even if  a god/gods exist, I could care fucking less. "

[Whitney]

A 6...I can't rule out the involvement of something beyond our current understanding of reality that could be the cause of all that exists and can think of way in which that something could rightly be labeled god; but given the lack of proof I have no reason to think that anything fitting the god label (or supernatural for that matter) exists. 

[Stevil]

A 6...I can't rule out the involvement of something beyond our current understanding of reality that could be the cause of all that exists and can think of way in which that something could rightly be labeled god; but given the lack of proof I have no reason to think that anything fitting the god label (or supernatural for that matter) exists. 

So to be a god this entity has to have created all of existence?
This is an action rather than a being. To be considered as human I don't have to have created a house, or have made an omellete for that matter.

[Whitney]

So to be a god this entity has to have created all of existence?

I take the word god to mean a being that created all that exists.

A highly intelligent alien who evolved into existence by natural processes yet has the ability to create other beings would not be a god.

[Tank]

A 6...I can't rule out the involvement of something beyond our current understanding of reality that could be the cause of all that exists and can think of way in which that something could rightly be labeled god; but given the lack of proof I have no reason to think that anything fitting the god label (or supernatural for that matter) exists. 

So to be a god this entity has to have created all of existence?
This is an action rather than a being. To be considered as human I don't have to have created a house, or have made an omellete for that matter.

But isn't it an act only God could carry out and an entity that could not do that could not be God (in the Xian/Muslim/Jewish sense)?

[Stevil]

So to be a god this entity has to have created all of existence?
This is an action rather than a being. To be considered as human I don't have to have created a house, or have made an omellete for that matter.

But isn't it an act only God could carry out and an entity that could not do that could not be God (in the Xian/Muslim/Jewish sense)?

As an Atheist I don't think we should limit the definition of god to the Christian/Muslim/Jewish sense. It seems to me they define a personality as their god rather than define what a god is.
A better description might be
A god is not constrained by space, time or substance.
A god has the ability to conjure up energy/matter at will from nothing.
A god is an intelligent entity and can understand information can derive knowledge and can make informed decisions and act unconstrained upon those decisions.

But it seems that YHWH doesn't even need to prove any of the requirements of a god. People just say that they know that YHWH exists, that they know that YHWH created existence, that they know that YHWH is all powerful, all knowing.

I am just not clear what would define a god and hence how we can recognise one when we see one. If you merely state that a god was the entity that created existence then you will never know who is god unless you can go back in time and see this entity perform this one time act. After this one time act has been performed now this god becomes redundant. Just seems like a fill of the gap of knowledge with regards to understanding where energy/matter came from.

[Evilbeagle]

I'd have to say a 6.  In fact, if when I died and I found that there was a God, I would have a few things to say to him.

I don't have a problem with God(s) so much as I have about the people who supposedly worship them.

[Medusa]

I'm a 6. The fact is I don't even get into if God exists questions anymore.


Here is the truth for me. And though it may confuse people, it's the simple answer I always give when asked.

God does not exist for me.

I word it that way for a reason. If God were to come down and float down in a white chariot and said TADA! I would say who cares? Not I. I choose to live in my world where God does not exist for me.