I also said I'd be interested in the six-month followup. I'll be interested to see what they're looking for.

While I criticized the test's assumptions, I do give the organization credit for trying. This can't be the easiest kind of data to gather, touching as it does on vague concepts and leaning on wishy-washy words. One set of questions had a preface that showed how determined the test makers were to get useful information: they specified "spiritual" as specifically supernatural, not merely metaphorical or feel-good. See? They really are trying.

Consider the problems people have thinking outside the religion box. Somebody will ask, "So who is the atheist pope? What is the atheist bible?" They're trying to understand something that has no analog in their worldview, but they must start somewhere.