View Single Post
Old December 6 2012, 01:38 PM   #149
Lieutenant Commander
Xhiandra's Avatar
Re: Why Not A Starfleet Ships Chaplain As A Main Character?

The fundamentalism of some of this board's posters is both incredibly scary and depressing.
Anyway, a chaplain would just about be the most un-Trek element to add to the franchise.

Though I'll grant that fundamentalist oxymora are hilarious. "Atheist dogma". XD.


Dawkins posits that "the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis like any other." He goes on to propose a continuous "spectrum of probabilities" between two extremes of opposite certainty, which can be represented by seven "milestones". Dawkins suggests definitive statements to summarize one's place along the spectrum of theistic probability. These "milestones" are:[2]
  1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
  2. De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
  3. Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
  4. Completely impartial. Exactly 50 per cent. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
  5. Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
  6. De facto atheist. Very low probability, but short of zero. "I don't 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."
Dawkins argues that while there appear to be plenty of individuals that would place themselves as "1" due to the strictness of religious doctrine against doubt, most atheists do not consider themselves "7" because atheism arises from a lack of evidence and evidence can always change a thinking person's mind. In print, Dawkins self-identified as a '6', though when interviewed by Bill Maher[3] and later by Anthony Kenny,[4] he suggested '6.9' to be more accurate.
Heh, he's basically re-stating the 4 classical categories and adding more intermediates:

- Strong theist/gnostic theist=Dawkins' "1".
- Weak theist/agnostic theist=Dawkins' "2" and "3".
- Weak atheist/agnostic atheist=Dawkins' "5" and "6".
- Strong atheist/gnostic atheist=Dawkins' "7".
His 4 is impossible: rationally you can think it's 50/50, but from there you either believe or not; some you're either a 3 or a 5.
But the point is true: gnostic atheists (7s) don't really exist outside of strawmen whereas theists are found both in agnostic (most of ours in the EU) and gnostic/fundie (plenty of them in the US and Middle East) varieties.

Last edited by Xhiandra; December 6 2012 at 01:53 PM.
Xhiandra is offline   Reply With Quote