Graph:Theism vs Deism vs Atheism.

kiffer

I've been a bit bored lately and something that someone said the other day in another thread triggered something in my head regarding theism and deism...
This fired off some stray thoughts into the pachinko / bagatelle board that is my brain and the following diagram is what fell out.




Basically it's your standard triaxial graph...
uB/B, Belief in the existance of a god or gods.
T, Theism, how much one thinks one god(s) interacts with the world.
D, Deism, how much of an input is needed to create the universe... kinda wishy-washy phrasing but I hope it becomes clearer as I move on down the post.

(at least that's how the names got there but things did not turn out as I expected more to come)

Finding where one fits on my silly little graph...
the uB axis just/roughly uses the Dawkins Scale (but shifted down to 0--6 rather than 1--7)
0 = 100% sure at least one god exists.
6 = 100% sure that there are no gods of any kind.

The T axis covers how much of an active roll gods take in the universe and the day to day running of it and peoples lives.
0 = God(s) don't interfere at all
1 = God(s) has interfered at least once.
2 = God(s) might interfere in some exceptional situations...
3 = \
4 = | God(s) interferes if asked to, but maybe not in the way expected...
5 = /
6 = God(s) interfere all the time, whether we ask them to or not... they can make us do things and regularly cause events to happen that would otherwise not happen.

The D axis covers the origins of the universe...
0 = I don't think any action is needed to start the universe
1 = I don't think any intelligent action is needed to start the universe
3 = ???
5 = There was/is probably some sort of prime mover, it's probably intelligent.
6 = There absolutely must be a Prime Mover, and it absolutely must be intelligent


Right... It needs better questions but I'm sure you get the general idea...
Having answered the questions you need to convert them into percentages... add up the score for each category and then divide each category's score by the result...

So for example a some one might answer... unB 2, T 4, D 5
so 2/11 = 18%, 4/11 = 36%, 5/11 = 45%
Marked A on the graph below.

A Hellenic pagan might answer uB 1, T 6, D 2
1/9= 11%, 6/9= 66%, 2/9 = 22%
Marked B.

Generally I would expect Christians to plot some where between the points marked 1 and 2... but never any further towards T than 1 although I guess I could be surprised ...




... um... anyway... the point of all this was to try and clear up the idea that both Atheism and Deism are sometimes defined as "the opposite of Theism" and I wanted a graph to show this... which I could have done with a much simpler graph but that wouldn't have split the idea of belief in general, from belief in an interceding god, and belief in a creator god...



Does anyone think this idea has any merit what so ever before I put any more thought into it? The questions could use some work I know but should I bother?

Zombrex

oww, my head

kiffer

Wicknight wrote: »

oww, my head

colours to garish?
I know it's a bit of a brain dump, I just thought it might be slightly interesting ...

Sam Vimes

Yes?

Naz_st

Wouldn't your conceptual mapping of belief to coordinates work more intuitively as part of a cube? (i.e. a simple XYZ axis?)



Either way, one issue with the mapping concept might be that these are not independent axes (as in coordinate geometry) since the position on the "belief in God" axis is going to effect, and supercede, the positions on either of the other two axes.

The Theism/Deism/Atheism definitions and confusion thereof is something that definitely crops up a lot I think (with a lot of people perhaps being deists without realising it, whilst thinking atheism is a bad word). Perhaps it's easier to squash it all down to a 1D scale, augmenting Dawkin's in effect to include Deism:

0-3: Atheists of various levels
4-6: Deists of various levels
7-10: Theists of various levels

and leave it at that? It would allow the Atheist/Deist combo (3,4) and Deist/Theist (6,7) but still keep Theists and Atheists apart (hoorah!)

3d.png

sink

I would describe myself as an atheist and an ignostic.

uB/B = 5

I don't know whether an entity which can be attributed the label god exists, but so far their is no evidence to suggest such and therefore I will make no assumptions. However without a more precise definition of what entails a god the question is so open that it is almost pointless.

It's akin to answering the question of what built the pyramids with 'A self-contained self maintaining organism which reproduces trough duplication and division and uses proteins to code it's attributes and has a metabolism including taking in raw materials, building components, converting energy, molecules and releasing by-products'. Although it is an infinitely more precise definition than the current English definition of god, it still describes virtually all life on this planet. Do you see the problem I'm getting at?

T = ?

I don't know whether an entity which could be attributed the label god has ever interacted with our universe. I am unwilling to say categorically either way. Unfortunately the way you labelled the scale does not account for that possibility. I assume that one hasn't since there is no evidence for such.

D = 3

We do not know and indeed it might be impossible from our perspective as part of the universe to ever know.

drkpower

Finally, the proof I've been looking for:

Atheists are nerds.

I'll get me coat......

kiffer

Naz_st wrote: »

Wouldn't your conceptual mapping of belief to coordinates work more intuitively as part of a cube? (i.e. a simple XYZ axis?)

It may do but a 3d graph is hard to draw on paper and I did most of my thinking about this whilst on the train drawing on some paper.
I'm used to using triangle plots from college so there is no intuitive problem for me...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_plot

Either way, one issue with the mapping concept might be that these are not independent axes (as in coordinate geometry) since the position on the "belief in God" axis is going to effect, and supercede, the positions on either of the other two axes.

um... yeah kinda... which is why it's an unBelief scale... the less you believe in gods the less it matters whether you believe they created the universe or whether they actively interferes. Someone that says 0 (or low) on the uB scale can be pulled toward D or T with out any great hindrance.

The Theism/Deism/Atheism definitions and confusion thereof is something that definitely crops up a lot I think (with a lot of people perhaps being deists without realising it, whilst thinking atheism is a bad word). Perhaps it's easier to squash it all down to a 1D scale, augmenting Dawkin's in effect to include Deism:

0-3: Atheists of various levels
4-6: Deists of various levels
7-10: Theists of various levels

and leave it at that? It would allow the Atheist/Deist combo (3,4) and Deist/Theist (6,7) but still keep Theists and Atheists apart (hoorah!)

ahhh but many Atheists are just as much Adeists as they are Atheists... I don't think a 1d scale covers it well at all...
could probably go for a 2d graph but I feel that that leaves out those polytheists that don't have a creator god to speak of.

The points on the T and D scales could use a lot of refining ... I didn't give them as much though as I could have.

kiffer

drkpower wrote: »

Finally, the proof I've been looking for:

Atheists are nerds.

I'll get me coat......

http://xkcd.com/55/

kiffer

sink wrote: »

I would describe myself as an atheist and an ignostic.

uB/B = 5

T = ?

D = 3

You plot somewhere on the pink magenta line...
Although probably not at the top of it...





EDIT: that line for sink should be straight... I must have been sloppier than I thought I was being.

eoin5

You could quantize the axis a bit more thoroughly. You could assign percentages to each discrete position of the axis that fits better with common thought on each subject. For instance maybe the jump between 4 to 5 is greater than 3 to 4 in most peoples minds.

The real fun would be figuring out these distances

Overblood

Throw this up on the Richard Dawkins forum and see what they make of it.

Sam Vimes

kiffer wrote: »

could probably go for a 2d graph but I feel that that leaves out those polytheists that don't have a creator god to speak of.

The only polytheist religion I know anything about, Hinduism, does have a creator god, Brahma

kiffer

Sam Vimes wrote: »

The only polytheist religion I know anything about, Hinduism, does have a creator god, Brahma

Brahma is a creator god but is not really the ex nihilo creator of the whole universe, he was (re)born out of a lotus flower that grew out of Vishnu's navel and out sourced the actual designing and fabricating work (Vishvakarman, who is listed as having a mother and father so a lot was going on before he laid the brickwork of Earth)...

Perhaps you're thinking of Brahman rather than Brahma ... either way I think most Hindu people would end up some where between 1 and 3 on the Graph...
Although... I thought Hinduism is pretty broad with a cyclical cosmology without beginning or end (or does it?) with each cycle lasting just over 311 trillion years.