What Kind Of Believer Are You? Take The Dawkins Test

As Mark Cheney writes on Big Think, the criteria:

Richard Dawkins’ Belief Scale Scoring Rubric

1. Strong Theist: I do not question the existence of God, I KNOW he exists.
2. 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.
3. Weak Theist: I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.
4. Pure Agnostic: God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.
5. Weak Atheist: I do not know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be skeptical.
6. 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.
7. Strong Atheist:
I am 100% sure that there is no God.

Do you believe in God? Sometimes this question warrants more than just a yes or no answer. To categorize one’s own beliefs about the possibility of the existence of a deity, Dawkins proposed a “spectrum of probabilities” in his book The God Delusion. This spectrum consists of two extremes — strong theist on one end, and strong atheist on the other. There are a number of milestones in between, which are all charted on a 7-point scale (e.g., “weak atheist”).

Musical Interlude:

Below are some of history’s greatest thinkers on the subject of God, religion and faith. We’ve scored them on the Dawkins scale for your reference…

More on Big Think

51 Comments on "What Kind Of Believer Are You? Take The Dawkins Test"

  1. DeepCough | Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 pm |

    I’m Option 8: Totally Indifferent.

  2. Define “God.” Oh, wait…

  3. aperfectcircle | Apr 10, 2012 at 11:27 pm |

    i was never good at tests.

  4. I believe only in the Emperor. He will deliver us from fuckwits like Dawkins.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQwTyGeoprA&feature=fvwrel 

    • BnalAlast | Apr 11, 2012 at 2:27 pm |

      What if we are at the Dark Age of Technology and Richard Dawkins is an incarnation the God-emperor of mankind running his crusade against religion?

  5. Jin The Ninja | Apr 11, 2012 at 12:02 am |

    reductive really. there are only 3 options: judeo-christian g-d, possible judeo-christian g-d or non belief (of judeo-christian g-d). so what about the rest of us? this is very limited in its scope, and really quite euro centric…. theism-atheism as a polarised spectrum? no nuance, and gives equivelant value to atheism as a system of belief to theism (judeo-christian). it all strikes me a bit self serving.

    • Indeed. Efforts to codify Atheism are counter productive even with the best intentions. Dawkins just wants to sell books, so fuck him.

      Well.. probably not wholly on topic to your comment Jin. But I tried.

    • Hazy Daisy | Apr 11, 2012 at 4:44 am |

      There is no nuance but you can force nuance as Albert Camus did when he said, “I don’t believe in God and I am not an atheist.”

  6. not a lot of wiggle room here. kinda tastes like self righteous bull to me.

  7. If this is the scale relating to the Evangelical Christian God, then 7 for sure.  Just saying ‘God’ is a bit vague though.  Theistic?  Deistic?

  8. Silly questionnaire.
    First you need to define the nature of God before you can state whether God exists or not.
    For example if God is the sum totality of life both corporeal and non-corporeal and that life is dimension and life energy is real, then God exists and God’s will is expressed in all of the choices life makes. Not as an individual entity but as the sum expression of infinite life.
    However if you define God or Gods by many of the monotheist or polytheist religious works, than those Gods as defined by those works definitely do not exist.

    •  There in lies the crux but for a little bit of light hearted fluff, and I’m assuming it’s not a serious questionaire that will be thrown up by the Concerned Women of America as somehow meaningful, I just answered it accordingly.

  9. God is irrelevant. We use it for whatever the hell we want. We debate it, we play with it, we go to war over it, we are engaged in mental masturbation with god. With or without knowledge of god(s), there is no god. Knowledge grips this non-existent god in the same way knowledge grips with non-existent fantasies. In fact god is the ultimate fantasy, the ultimate pleasure ever conceived by the mind. Strong 7 for me.

    • I agree, although I arrived at the conclusion by a different route.

      I just don’t see how a God would matter even if it did exist.

      • Indeed. It is all a mind game. If anybody believes in any god, it is because they are compelled to do so by culture. The persons mother or father told them, the culture shapes and molds and isolates their pattern of thought, so even if they call the whole thing bluff sentiment and threat of being ostracized binds them. SO when people tell me they ‘believe in god(s)’ I automatically know whether I tell them or not that what they really believe in, or have submitted to is their culture.

        • Almost everything comes to us from society. Belief and disbelief. Definitions of virtue and vice. Your knowledge of scientific facts. There is very little that you actually know about the world from interaction with it, and what you do know is shaped by what society taught you, is filtered, so to speak, so that it fits into your mind in a certain way. Which makes me wonder what you presume yourself to be saying. That the idea of God comes to us from society has no bearing on whether or not he exists, just as scientific statements that come to us through society are not true or false based on that fact.

          It sounds like you’ve come into tertiary contact with social-construction theory and just decided to half-ass it. You are not outside society, yet you act like it in claiming to know that something doesn’t exist (which is just ridiculous. You can’t know that something does not exist, you can only know what does exist).

  10. Dan Gilliland | Apr 11, 2012 at 1:07 am |

    #1 I know God exists and I know it is neither a he or a she.  That is dualism and God is the manifest of all that is, therefore it can not be a sex. 

  11. I’m a bit different; I’m part 4, but I mainly believe the question is irrelevant to what kind of “believer”I am. But my recognition of the probability of an engineer doesn’t negate my belief that it really doesn’t matter in the least EITHER way…

    Science can be verified, while religion is subjective literary/verbal/social works. I think there should be an option for people who understand this. Whether I believe in Jesus or not, doesn’t negate the existence of the CONCEPT of that character. Other peoples thoughts on him, the historical/literary journey/evolution the character has taken on.

    So I think the test is just a series of pigeon holes.
    Like… How can I be 100% certain of the non-existence of something that by its very nature can’t be proven. That’s kinda absurd.

  12. I’ll put my hand up and say I’m a 6. Sure, I look a lot bigger but I’m quite short. Oh wait. No, still a 6 – de facto atheist, for want of an equally unneccesary but better term. (?) With my pedantic need to correct the phrase to it being “a god” and “it/they”; i.e. gender neutral and not neccesarily monotheistic. Yep pedantic but neccesary or people may labour under all manner of misapprehension.

  13. Some of these distinctions strike me as less descriptive of a general attitude than a tactical stance for a specific debate. The difference between a weak and a strong atheist is a good example of that.

  14. For this scale to have meaning “God” needs to be defined.  Good luck getting a consensus on that one.

  15. Not believeing in the bible = atheism. Why do people still maintain this incredibly weak equation?

    • Jin The Ninja | Apr 13, 2012 at 6:19 pm |

       we’re chained to the bonds of christianity through western culture as a whole. the New-Atheists like dawkins, instead of weakening those links- actually forge new ones, that rely on entirely different (but related) euro-centric conceits.

  16. I used to be a 3, now I am a 1.

  17. groan..  really?   really?  you need to take a TEST now to figger this out for yourself?   the stupid light just won’t keep flashing in my brane.

  18. Gregory Wyrdmaven | Apr 11, 2012 at 8:54 am |

    Well, the argument is silly.  The question is wrong.  “Do you believe in God?”  In the Western World, this means the Abrahamic god, Yahweh, or as I refer to him, The Semetic Deity of Sheep Molestin’.  It also says there is one god, which is again a Western idea.  This is lateral, complex thinking, atheists.  These are difficult ideas, which resist Aristotelian logic, in that it is either on or off, black or white, paper or plastic. 

    The proper questions are:  What would a god be?  Why is it just now in the modern era that people seem to question the concept of deity?  What is consciousness, since a deity would be an expression of it?  How can atheists see to type articles when their head is up their rectums?

    These are the pressing questions.

    Other questions are:  if there is no consciousness other than our perception of it, then aren’t we only thinking that we are thinking?  Why is it that there are no atheists in indigenous societies?  Why do atheists use the word “Science” when they mean “Things we discovered that were already there and which we didn’t create and aren’t responsible for” and how come you can replace the words Science, Evolution and Natural Selection with Higher Intelligence and it all means the same?  How come some humans think they are infallible and so think Science is infallible when history shows us that scientific thought changes over time and that it took about 500 years for it to be accepted that the universe doesn’t revolve around the earth?  Why would anyone who doesn’t have spam between their ears look at a world that is only energy vibrating at a slow enough speed to be temporarily tangible and think that it is the only reality?

    Fiat lux

  19. Antediluvian | Apr 11, 2012 at 10:30 am |

    Chaote here.  Sometimes I KNOW s/he exists.  Other times I banish that idea.  Problem category fags?

  20. I abstain.

  21. Anyone who “knows” that G-O-D exists is delusional. Anyone who “knows” that G-O-D does not exist is equally delusional. It is unknowable. Make your fucking peace with the fact that you will never know – one way or the other – and then move on and try to enjoy your life for what it actually is.  

  22. I know many polytheists and don’t see a listing for them here. Strong YHVH bias at work on this one.

  23. BnalAlast | Apr 11, 2012 at 2:29 pm |

    What if there are many creators? and they just don’t care about mankind?

  24. Ricky Jazzercise | Apr 11, 2012 at 3:43 pm |

    I performed magickal rites by performing prescribed rituals I read about in books and established communication with my Holy Guardian Angel (magick term, kind of stupid I know) who educates me as to the nature of the larger reality or macro-consciousness on a nightly basis. Where does that put me?

  25. Ceausescu | Apr 11, 2012 at 4:41 pm |

    It’s funny how people are eager to comment on ambiguous subjects such as this one.

  26. why do so many atheists use the male pronoun when discussing god ?

  27. Ardethbey13 | Apr 12, 2012 at 1:26 pm |

    These categories are pointless if you don’t define “God”. 

  28. Superdevil | Apr 12, 2012 at 2:54 pm |

    I just want to let you all know that I am God and that I don’t exist.  Even if I did I wouldn’t answer any of your prayers so stop bugging me.

  29. and what about gnosticism, the strong inclination (not belief) that there is something we cannot comprehend, explain or disprove. dawkins is a douche when he gets like this and if he keeps on like this he will get to papal levels of ignorance.

Comments are closed.