Beyond Yes or No

I definitely agree with Mark Cheney that the question of whether someone believes in God merits a response that goes beyond a simple yes or no. However, I would add a few caveats to his "Are You a Believer? Take The Dawkins Test"

First I would point out that the test in question only has any substance if you start by verifying which version of the God concept is being asked about. It is possible to have different answers depending on the version. When it comes to the God of scripture I would not hesitate to place myself as a "7. Strong Atheist: I am 100% sure that there is no God." If asked about the abstract version I would have to drop down a bit. Without that clarification, the 1-7 point scale isn't that much more informative than a yes/no response. Even though I am by no means a fan of Hitchens I think Cheney's take on his position is a good example of how misleading this test can be without that clarifying point. He puts Hitchens as a 7 but if you pay attention to the details of the quotation he uses it is clearly a reference to the Judeo-Christian scriptural God. Would he be so certain if asked about the abstract form of the God? Maybe. This leads to another important point.

Don't ascribe a specific number to an individual who cannot verify or clarify it for themselves. Hitchens being dead cannot agree or disagree. It is possible to get a good sense of where he would stand on the question from the body of his work but that is still not good enough. A number range with more of an explanation would be more appropriate. Hitchens would probably be between a 6 and a 7 due to the strong language he frequently used. You could cite a variety of articles, columns, books, interviews, etc... to support both numbers.

Third, if you are going to attempt to ascribe a number(s) to an individual, whether dead or alive, spend more than five minutes researching. Cheney's take on Woody Allen is pathetic. Allen is a humorist well known for a variety of literary gags and the occasional one-liners. That does not mean he has not seriously thought about metaphysical matters. Anyone who has read his writings and watched his films would know that he definitely leans toward strong atheism. I still would not want to choose numbers for him since I get the sense that he does not take kindly to people speaking for him. I certainly wouldn't fault him for that. I don't take kindly to people telling me what I really think.

The idea of a "test" is interesting and could be a useful tool for the purposes of discussion but it has its limits.