Most philosophers are atheist.

[Jehanne]

What was the response rate of the survey?  If it wasn't at least 85%, then I would take it with a large grain of salt.  Having said that, if you take those numbers as accurate, what would follow from the fact?  Not much...

This is the second comment in the thread about this. Nobody knows how statistics and polling work... you guys need a crash course? I could make a topic lol

If they put a number down of people they surveyed then the answer is 100%. All of those people partook in this survey. They would not put that number otherwise. They're called respondents aren't they?

There are, of course, only so many philosophers in the World today.  If their survey was not a census, then it was at least a quorum.

I did work in Statistical Process Control for 14 years, have a MBA from a major university, etc.

[Aegon]

This is the second comment in the thread about this. Nobody knows how statistics and polling work... you guys need a crash course? I could make a topic lol

If they put a number down of people they surveyed then the answer is 100%. All of those people partook in this survey. They would not put that number otherwise. They're called respondents aren't they?

There are, of course, only so many philosophers in the World today.  If their survey was not a census, then it was at least a quorum.

I did work in Statistical Process Control for 14 years, have a MBA from a major university, etc.

I dont know why I'm pretending to be an authority on the matter. Common syndrome on the internet but not one I've gotten. I blame hospital drugs and whathaveyou.

[Edwardo Piet]

12.5% don't understand what the words mean, I notice. Some philosophers they are.

Really?  So, deists are theists now?   Or are they atheists?

IOW, could it be that respondents who answered "other" did so because they *do* know what words mean, and both atheist and theist fail to capture the nuance of their position?

Deism is a form of theism, yes. "Theism" just means belief in a god/deity which includes deism. If you're not an atheist, you're a theist. "Atheist" means "non-theist" and "theist" and "non-theist" is a true dichotomy that covers everything. Since the answer "neither" to any "x or non-x" dichotomy doesn't make logical sense. True dichotomies are any x/non-x. Which is what theism/atheism is. Because it's identical to theism/non-theism. You can't logically answer with "neither" in this case. False dichotomies are dichotomies in which you can logically answer with "neither".

People often use "theism" to refer to specifically non-deistic theism, to refer to specifically a belief in a personal god, but on another level deism is a sub category of theism because "theism" just means belief in any god, including impersonal deistic gods. The fact "deism" is used at all is simply so it's easier to specify that you mean specifically impersonal non-interventionist theism.

And no it's because they don't know what the words mean. If you're not a non-theist you're a theist. And atheism is non-theism. "a-theism"= "without theism". Which includes without deism.

[Minimalist]

Having said that, if you take those numbers as accurate, what would follow from the fact? 

That 14.6% of philosophers are ignorant.

[Jehanne]

There are, of course, only so many philosophers in the World today.  If their survey was not a census, then it was at least a quorum.

I did work in Statistical Process Control for 14 years, have a MBA from a major university, etc.

I dont know why I'm pretending to be an authority on the matter. Common syndrome on the internet but not one I've gotten. I blame hospital drugs and whathaveyou.

It isn't complex -- if a census is possible and economical, then take a census.  If a sample is only possible (e.g., "blood draw", and as an aside note, if you meet someone who doesn't believe in statistical sampling, advise them to tell the lab tech that, "I don't believe in statistical sampling, and so, 'take it all'" for their next labs), then one has no choice but to sample.  Still, it is often the difference between tasting from a large pot versus a smaller one; often, the same-sized spoon does the job just as well.  With 3K philosophers out of what, 10K at most, the sample, even if it was not random, was probably thoroughly representative.  If not, one would have expected some sort of blow-black from the "believing" contingency of philosophers.  Even Francis Collins admits that most of his colleagues within the National Academy of Sciences are atheistic, and the response rate for that survey was only 50%; in fact, it is more likely than not that the believing NAS members were more likely to respond than the non-believing ones, for that latter really did not have much of a motive to do so!

[Jackalope]

Really?  So, deists are theists now?   Or are they atheists?

IOW, could it be that respondents who answered "other" did so because they *do* know what words mean, and both atheist and theist fail to capture the nuance of their position?

Deism is a form of theism, yes. "Theism" just means belief in a god/deity which includes deism. If you're not an atheist, you're a theist. "Atheist" means "non-theist" and "theist" and "non-theist" is a true dichotomy that covers everything. Since the answer "neither" to any "x or non-x" dichotomy doesn't make logical sense. True dichotomies are any x/non-x. Which is what theism/atheism is. Because it's identical to theism/non-theism. You can't logically answer with "neither" in this case. False dichotomies are dichotomies in which you can logically answer with "neither".

People often use "theism" to refer to specifically non-deistic theism, to refer to specifically a belief in a personal god, but on another level deism is a sub category of theism because "theism" just means belief in any god, including impersonal deistic gods. The fact "deism" is used at all is simply so it's easier to specify that you mean specifically impersonal non-interventionist theism.

And no it's because they don't know what the words mean. If you're not a non-theist you're a theist. And atheism is non-theism. "a-theism"= "without theism". Which includes without deism.

Dude, drop the pedantry and grab a dictionary because you're flat fucking wrong here. You're cherry picking a single definition, the most broad and least able to represent nuance and saying it's THE definition. The other definition I am aware of makes a clear distinction between between deism and theism - and if a deist is present with the options of Theist/atheist/other, it's not going to be that overly broad definition you have in mind that they're thinking of.

So no, it is not a result of them not knowing what wordsean, it's a matter of you failing to recognize that words have not only one relavent meaning, and it's not your choice which one anyone else applies in this spot.

This is in fact a mirror image of a bad argument that some theists use to insist atheism means only a denial of God's existence. It's no less bad when one of us uses it.

[Edwardo Piet]

Dude, apply the pedantry (or rather, apply the accuracy) and grab a dictionary. I spent 8 months of my life daily reading them.

Actually I thought you were aware that atheism means simply non-belief in gods and the alternative is belief in gods which is what theism means. And yes, again, deism absolutely is a form of theism. Deism=non-interventionist theism. Atheism=non-theism.

But nevermind. I am absolutely not flat fucking wrong I'm flat fucking right. You are flat fucking wrong. Just because I know I'm flat fucking right in no way makes me wrong. I'm right because I'm referring to the percentage of philosophers who deny a true dichotomy and pointing out their error.

[LadyForCamus]

Children!!! Mommy has a headache! I swear, I will turn this car around!

[Edwardo Piet]

12.5% don't understand what the words mean, I notice. Some philosophers they are.

Really?  So, deists are theists now?   Or are they atheists?

IOW, could it be that respondents who answered "other" did so because they *do* know what words mean, and both atheist and theist fail to capture the nuance of their position?

My bold. So yeah, deists aren't theists 'now' as in only now. Deists have always fucking been theists. All deists are theists but not all theists are deists. All dogs are animals but not all animals are dogs. It's basic logic. The fact you ask if deists are atheists and you know the answer is "no" entails that they are indeed theists.

Hundreds of years ago Christians didn't distinguish between deists and atheists because as far as they were concerned they were both heretics/heathens and that is all that mattered to them. That is obviously completely outdated now. Maybe YOU should get a dictionary, Mr. condesceding.

---

Children!!!  Mommy has a headache!  I swear, I will turn this car around!

Lol I'm just explaining why he's wrong and he started with the condescension and attitude with telling me to get a dictionary when he doesn't even grasp a basic logical dichotomy (and he's not even right and yet has the arrogance to state that I'm 'flat fucking wrong' when he's flat fucking wrong and may as well be saying that not all non-bachelors are married) so fuck it. There's no sense in 2017 in which deism is atheism (which is the only alternative to deism being theism). The minority of philosophers who think there is an "other" option with regards to the theism/non-theism(atheism) dichotomy are fucking deluded. They may as well say they identity as as a square circle. Well whoopty doo Mr. Square Circle you don't even know what the fuck you are identifying as.

---

Okay I promise that I will not continue this discussion any further unless I forget I said this or fail to notice this comment before posting again EDIT: or adding more arguments within this post by editing this post. It won't be productive and I don't wanna end up getting myself banned over unimportant shit regardless of how accurate I am. EDIT: And regardless I am so far failing my new attempt to be more civil. So I will keep trying to be more civil.

EDIT: Made text purple, red and bold to help avoid myself missing it.

[Abaddon_ire]

This is the second comment in the thread about this. Nobody knows how statistics and polling work... you guys need a crash course? I could make a topic lol

If they put a number down of people they surveyed then the answer is 100%. All of those people partook in this survey. They would not put that number otherwise. They're called respondents aren't they?

There are, of course, only so many philosophers in the World today.  If their survey was not a census, then it was at least a quorum.

I did work in Statistical Process Control for 14 years, have a MBA from a major university, etc.

There are plenty of philosophers out there and I have read many of their writings.

However, I have only one credentialled philosopher that is personally known to me. At the time, I was teaching computer hardware and he was teaching COBOL. (we are back in the early nineties). Nice guy, total pussycat and so forth, I got on really well with the guy.

But, I had to ask when I found out that his primary degree was in philosophy how he ended up teaching COBOL on a vax platform. His answer was ironically philosophical.

He said, "I discovered that a degree in philosophy is effectively useless. Most graduates will get no job. I found that a graduate degree in philosophy will not butter my toast or put milk on my cornflakes, it is frankly a recipe for poverty, so what I did was leverage my degree to get into something that was  real world useful so I could pay my bills and live a reasonable life and fuck you dave you just made me do philosophy you bastage"