- Joined
- Sep 15, 2013
- Messages
- 9,426
- Reaction score
- 4,925
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
There's a pretty big difference between supposing that the probability of there being any sort of god is extremely small (<10%? <1%?) and supposing that probability of there being some sort of god is plausible to probable (30% or 50% or 70%). Dawkins seems pretty firmly in the <1% camp and obviously isn't an agnostic (he thinks he knows with pretty high confidence that there is no god); in fact if I recall correctly he bemoans the fact that the idea of agnosticism exists at all, apparently wanting people to 'pick a side' just as much as religious propagandists do, thereby encumbering themselves with the psychological biases that such side-choosing tends to entail. By contrast someone whose confidence in the proposition "there is some kind of god" is around the 10 or 20% mark presumably is both an agnostic and an atheist by most widely accepted definitions... while trying to tell someone whose confidence is more around the 70 or 80% mark that they're an atheist would be a pretty hard sell, even if they don't necessarily "believe" that there's a god.
Assigning percentages to confidence or 'probability' of a proposition like that is obviously somewhat vague or arbitrary - outside the ends near 0 and 100 a simple five point scale would work about as well - but much less so than a two point scale! The binary dividing line of 'belief' makes tactical sense from the standpoint of religious evangelism (which may be why it's gained traction among many atheists), but not so much for anyone who wants to think with a little more nuance and clarity on a subject.