Pick a number......

thebouldwhacker · 10-06-2009 01:00AM #1

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability 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 do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical.'
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.'

thebouldwhacker · 10-06-2009 01:06AM

Hi all,

Thought I'd post this up with a poll just to see where people stand. If this is a repeat thread so sorry...

Galvasean · 10-06-2009 01:09AM

Number 6 for me. Anyone who thinks they are a number seven is just as deluded as number 1.

rockmongrel · 10-06-2009 01:20AM

6 for me.

I live with the philosophy, one can neither prove nor disprove the existence of god/creator/builder, so one should just get over it and live their lives.

Edit: Typo.

Overblood · 10-06-2009 01:48AM

Galvasean wrote: »

Number 6 for me. Anyone who thinks they are a number seven is just as deluded as number 1.

What's wrong with picking no.7? Where would you be on that scale regarding the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Sam Vimes · 10-06-2009 07:23AM

What's wrong with picking number 7 is that you're saying you know enough about the universe to completely dismiss the possibility of a god. Whatever about the god in the bible, human beings don't know enough yet to totally rule out all forms of god, we can just say it's very very unlikely

It's about the same as a theist who looks at the unlikelihood of earth being where it is and life evolving etc and says it must have been a god, ruling out all possible natural explanations

We have no evidence of the supernatural but that's not the same as having evidence of its non existence

The Mad Hatter · 10-06-2009 09:28AM

Six.

Occasional vague beliefs in something spiritual (hey, I'm a musician), but an overarching god figure? I don't think so.

toiletduck · 10-06-2009 09:38AM

Six. No surprise that it's the top polling option.

CerebralCortex · 10-06-2009 09:44AM

I picked 7 just to be contrary and plus I hate being labeled and classified. Everyones experience is different.

Zillah · 10-06-2009 10:02AM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

We have no evidence of the supernatural but that's not the same as having evidence of its non existence

Yes it is evidence actually. Its not proof, which is what we'd need for option 7.

5uspect · 10-06-2009 10:36AM

Overblood wrote: »

What's wrong with picking no.7? Where would you be on that scale regarding the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

The flying spaghetti monster is a version of Bertrand Russell's Teapot.

It is very very very unlikely but cannot be discounted. The argument is that if someone want their god respected etc they must in turn offer the same respect they desire to the Pink Unicorn. This winds up theists no end.

Húrin · 10-06-2009 11:15AM

2

Overblood · 10-06-2009 11:41AM

5uspect wrote: »

The flying spaghetti monster is a version of Bertrand Russell's Teapot.

It is very very very unlikely but cannot be discounted. The argument is that if someone want their god respected etc they must in turn offer the same respect they desire to the Pink Unicorn. This winds up theists no end.

Why are you explaining the flying spaghetti monster to me? I asked you where on the scale of 1 to 7 you would find yourself regarding the FSM. Do you think it might exist? I'd be a 7.

This poll is silly anyway, since it could be applied to anything. How about I tell you that there exists a creature that looks like a half cow, one quarter unicorn and one quarter duck that flys using photon rays shot out it's arse. You'd pick a number 6 would you?

Calibos · 10-06-2009 11:48AM

If the question were phrased in terms of the God of any and all human religions past or present, I would pick Number 7.

If the question is phrased in terms of a non interventionist universe creating 'God' ie. a Deist God, then I would pick number 6.

I have a feeling that would be how most here would vote.

5uspect · 10-06-2009 12:00PM

Overblood wrote: »

Why are you explaining the flying spaghetti monster to me? I asked you where on the scale of 1 to 7 you would find yourself regarding the FSM. Do you think it might exist? I'd be a 7.

This poll is silly anyway, since it could be applied to anything. How about I tell you that there exists a creature that looks like a half cow, one quarter unicorn and one quarter duck that flys using photon rays shot out it's arse. You'd pick a number 6 would you?

Now you're getting it! In science you can only fail to show something. You falsify a claim, no more. The evidence shows that hypothesis X is invalid at explaining the evidence and therefore unlikely. Just because something appears silly like a photon propelled unicorn duck

doesn't mean its impossible. Look at the platypus for an example of silly.

If I described a platypus to someone they'd think I was taking the piss. If I showed them evidence of one (photos, a live specimen) then I have failed to falsify my hypothesis that such a creature indeed exists but falsified their hypothesis that I'm talking out of my arse.

Of course the hypothesis remains that the whole world is a dream and none of this is real. Its unlikely but must be considered, at least philosophically.
Ultimately a lot of these ideas, including God, are untestable so they are heaped into the silly bin anyway.

Overblood · 10-06-2009 12:49PM

The god of the Christian bible doesn't exist. I know it's unscientific to choose no.7, but if I was scientific enough to get to 6 by reasoning etc., then I may as well jump over to no.7. I'm rounding off my 6.9 to a 7.

And as Calibos said, this is my view on the god of christianity.

Whatever atheist picks no.6 is lying to themselves.

Dades · 10-06-2009 12:56PM

Overblood wrote: »

Whatever atheist picks no.6 is lying to themselves.

What about 3-5? Those darned agnostics just won't admit it!

The Mad Hatter · 10-06-2009 12:58PM

Overblood wrote: »

The god of the Christian bible doesn't exist. I know it's unscientific to choose no.7, but if I was scientific enough to get to 6 by reasoning etc., then I may as well jump over to no.7. I'm rounding off my 6.9 to a 7.

And as Calibos said, this is my view on the god of christianity.

Whatever atheist picks no.6 is lying to themselves.

Seriously, I'm gonna have to message the admins about installing a 'wtf' button next to the 'thanks' button...

5uspect · 10-06-2009 01:24PM

To pick no. 7 is to be totally and absolutely sure. Nothing is that certain, even the rotation of the earth around the sun as hard as it is to believe. As you say you would pick 6.9 and I would agree with this part.
But even 6.999.. is a world away from the absolute unchangable closed world of 7.

TheInquisitor · 10-06-2009 01:28PM

I pick 7 because i am 100% sure there is no god

dvpower · 10-06-2009 01:34PM

Overblood wrote: »

What's wrong with picking no.7? Where would you be on that scale regarding the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

A Flying Spagetti Monster might exist in some parallel universe.

... come to think of it, God might exist in a parallel universe.:eek:

TheInquisitor wrote: »

I pick 7 because i am 100% sure there is no god

Excellent. Now, if you could just provide the proof you have, we can all upgrade to a 7.

pH · 10-06-2009 02:12PM

I just wish there was an '8' ... I'd have gone with that

10-06-2009 02:26PM

Can't pick a number, because your scale is a dichotomy between theist and atheist, and a distortion of reality in that it places people into convenient categories, when their behaviour is often more complex and context laden (as is the natural world we live in). See Jacques Derrida in Points for more discussion regarding the problematic condition of dichotomies.

**Yikes! I've had way too much coffee this morning!:eek: Someone pass me a Guinness!

Overblood · 10-06-2009 02:35PM

Why is there a 7th choice if anyone who chooses it is wrong? It should really be 1-6 so shouldn't it?

I would choose #7 for many things, including a species of tiger that looks like a banana, but not yellow like a banana, it still has it's original tiger colours, and it lives on O' Connell street in Dublin.

Are you saying I'm wrong to choose #7 and say that there's absolutely no such thing as the banana tiger?

To those who say that it is akin to choosing #1, that is not true. Choosing #1 displays an extreme amount of arrogance. God exists, he made me, he made my universe for me, he listens to me, he watches over me etc etc.

Option #7 is the total opposite. There is no god, plain and simple, just as there is no banana tiger.

thebouldwhacker · 10-06-2009 02:36PM

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

Can't pick a number, because your scale is a dichotomy between theist and atheist, and a distortion of reality in that it places people into convenient categories, when their behaviour is often more complex and context laden (as is the natural world we live in). See Jacques Derrida in Points for more discussion regarding the problematic condition of dichotomies.

ahh... one can hardly encapsulate the true spectrum of beliefs here with a 6 option poll, think of it as a toy rather than the inqusition

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Seriously, I'm gonna have to message the admins about installing a 'wtf' button next to the 'thanks' button...

Though I think this summs up my feelings better:D:D:D

Overblood · 10-06-2009 02:46PM

dvpower wrote: »

Excellent. Now, if you could just provide the proof you have, we can all upgrade to a 7.

Noboady has to disprove the millenia old hallucinations of an illiterate stone age shepherd.

If that's the case then we're all f**ked for not believing in unicorns, FSM, and black turtle-gobbling cheese cake monsters (they live on the moon - DISPROVE IT SO!!!).

Don't fool yourselves. When you log off tonight and make a cup of tea, you'll be a #7. Come back to boards tomorrow and you'll be a #6 again. It's "cool" to be a #6 isn't it?

Sam Vimes · 10-06-2009 02:48PM

Overblood wrote: »

Why is there a 7th choice if anyone who chooses it is wrong? It should really be 1-6 so shouldn't it?

I would choose #7 for many things, including a species of tiger that looks like a banana, but not yellow like a banana, it still has it's original tiger colours, and it lives on O' Connell street in Dublin.

Are you saying I'm wrong to choose #7 and say that there's absolutely no such thing as the banana tiger?

To those who say that it is akin to choosing #1, that is not true. Choosing #1 displays an extreme amount of arrogance. God exists, he made me, he made my universe for me, he listens to me, he watches over me etc etc.

Option #7 is the total opposite. There is no god, plain and simple, just as there is no banana tiger.

It is acceptable to be a #7 for the banana tiger because we can thoroughly check O'Connell street and verifying that there is no banana tiger there. That claim is falsifiable. And we can say with reasonable certainty that a tiger cannot exist in the shape of a banana because of our knowledge of biology. But evolution is a funny thing and we have not been to every planet in the universe so it's possible that there is one out there somewhere.

You can still live your life operating under the assumption that the tiger does not exist. Being a #6 just leaves open the possibility that you could be wrong

Overblood · 10-06-2009 02:58PM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

It is acceptable to be a #7 for the banana tiger because we can thoroughly check O'Connell street and verifying that there is no banana tiger there. That claim is falsifiable. And we can say with reasonable certainty that a tiger cannot exist in the shape of a banana because of our knowledge of biology. But evolution is a funny thing and we have not been to every planet in the universe so it's possible that there is one out there somewhere.

You can still live your life operating under the assumption that the tiger does not exist. Being a #6 just leaves open the possibility that you could be wrong

The banana tiger does exist on o'connell street. He uses a cloaking device, on loan from the Predator. DISPROVE IT SO!!!:pac:

So you'd choose #6 in relation to the banana tiger of O' Connell street?

If a banana tiger is eventually captured and displayed in a zoo, I'd move to #1 and accept that I was wrong. But for now, I'm #7.

Genghiz Cohen · 10-06-2009 03:00PM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

It is acceptable to be a #7 for the banana tiger because we can thoroughly check O'Connell street and verifying that there is no banana tiger there. That claim is falsifiable. And we can say with reasonable certainty that a tiger cannot exist in the shape of a banana because of our knowledge of biology. But evolution is a funny thing and we have not been to every planet in the universe so it's possible that there is one out there somewhere.

In Quantum Mechanics while not being observed, O'Connell street is in all states, including being made entirely of the lint out of the bottom of my pockets.
It's only when we observe something we collapse the probability waves to a definite state.

So, at 4 in the morning when nobody is around, it is in fact infested with those pesky banana tigers.

Or so is my understanding.

Sam Vimes · 10-06-2009 03:09PM

Overblood wrote: »

The banana tiger does exist on o'connell street. He uses a cloaking device, on loan from the Predator. DISPROVE IT SO!!!:pac:

So you'd choose #6 in relation to the banana tiger of O' Connell street?

If a banana tiger is eventually captured and displayed in a zoo, I'd move to #1 and accept that I was wrong. But for now, I'm #7.

Yes I'd be a #6 in that case. Until I can definitively prove that there is no banana tiger with a cloaking device there is always the possibility that there is something going on that I don't know about. I can operate under the assumption that there's no tiger though and behave exactly as a #7 until more evidence is presented

Galvasean · 10-06-2009 03:13PM

Overblood wrote: »

What's wrong with picking no.7? Where would you be on that scale regarding the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

6. Just like any other God I find the idea extremely unlikely. I can't be 100% sure, but I'm pretty damn close.
If we want to split hairs I'm a very high 6, as close to 7 you can get without actually being a 7.

Pick a number......

Read the options and pick a number 127 votes

Comments