# Spectrum of theistic probability

Part of a series on :
Irreligion :
Irreligion
Antireligion
Anti-clericalism
Criticism of religion
Freethought
Organized secularism
Parody religion
Secular humanism
Secular liberalism
Secular state
Secularism
Secularity
Secularization
Separation of church and state :
Atheism
History
Demographics
Discrimination/Persecution
Criticism
Lists of atheists
Forms and variations
Implicit and explicit
Negative and positive
New
State
Aspects
Antitheism
Relationship between atheism and religion
Existence of God :
Agnosticism
Strong
Weak
Agnostic atheism
Apatheism
List of agnostics :
People
Atheists
Agnostics
Humanists :
Books
The Age of Reason
Breaking the Spell
The Demon-Haunted World
The End of Faith
The God Delusion
God Is Not Great
Letter to a Christian Nation
The System of Nature
Why I Am Not a Christian
Why I Am Not a Muslim
Why I Am an Atheist :
List of irreligious organizations
American Atheists
American Humanist Association
Atheist Alliance International
Center for Inquiry
Freedom From Religion Foundation
Humanists International
Humanists UK
Rational Response Squad
Recovering from Religion
Brazilian Association of Atheists and Agnostics :
Related topics
Countries by irreligion
Disestablishmentarianism
Secular ethics
Irreligion by country :
vte :
Popularized by Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion, the spectrum of theistic probability is a way of categorizing one's belief regarding the probability of the existence of a deity.

## Atheism, theism, and agnosticism

J. J. C. Smart argues that the distinction between atheism and agnosticism is unclear, and many people who have passionately described themselves as agnostics were in fact atheists. He writes that this mischaracterization is based on an unreasonable philosophical skepticism that would not allow us to make any claims to knowledge about the world. He proposes instead the following analysis:
   Let us consider the appropriateness or otherwise of someone (call him 'Philo') describing himself as a theist, atheist or agnostic. I would suggest that if Philo estimates the various plausibilities to be such that on the evidence before him the probability of theism comes out near to one he should describe himself as a theist and if it comes out near zero he should call himself an atheist, and if it comes out somewhere in the middle he should call himself an agnostic. There are no strict rules about this classification because the borderlines are vague. If need be, like a middle-aged man who is not sure whether to call himself bald or not bald, he should explain himself more fully.

## Dawkins' formulation

In The God Delusion, Richard 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:
* Strong theist. 100% probability of God. In the words of Carl Jung: "I do not believe, I know."
* De facto theist. Very high probability but short of 100%. "I don't know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there."
* Leaning towards theism. Higher than 50% but not very high. "I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God."
* Completely impartial. Exactly 50%. "God's existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
* Leaning towards atheism. Lower than 50% but not very low. "I do not know whether God exists but I'm inclined to be skeptical."
* 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."
* 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". When interviewed by Bill Maher and later by Anthony Kenny, he suggested "6.9" to be more accurate.