Rejecting the Label "Brights": Why Freethinkers Disagree

  • Thread starter Thread starter Adeimantus
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the term "Bright," proposed by Richard Dawkins and Dan Dennett for philosophical naturalists, and the reactions to this label within the community of freethinkers and atheists. Participants explore the implications of labeling oneself and the connotations associated with different terms, including "Freethinker," "atheist," and "philosophical naturalist." The conversation touches on personal preferences for self-identification and the potential social ramifications of these labels.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants find the term "Bright" to be off-putting and suggest that it could create negative associations, with one comparing it to "The Elect."
  • Others express a preference for terms like "scientific naturalist," "philosophical naturalist," or simply "atheist," indicating discomfort with the label "Bright."
  • A participant mentions that they prefer not to label themselves at all, feeling secure in their beliefs without needing a classification.
  • Concerns are raised that the term "Bright" might provoke confrontation among religious individuals.
  • Some participants discuss the clarity of the term "atheist," emphasizing its straightforwardness compared to the ambiguity of other labels.
  • There is a question about whether "philosophical naturalist" is synonymous with "atheist," with one participant clarifying that while all philosophical naturalists are atheists, the term encompasses more than just atheism.
  • Several participants share humorous associations with the term "Bright," likening it to toys or new age concepts, which detracts from its intended meaning.
  • One participant notes that "bright" is synonymous with "intelligent" in British English, which may explain its use, while others point out regional differences in interpretation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not agree on the appropriateness of the term "Bright," with multiple competing views on its implications and effectiveness as a label. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best terminology for identifying philosophical naturalists and atheists.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying degrees of discomfort with labeling, and there are unresolved questions about the nuances of terms like "philosophical naturalist" and "atheist." The discussion reflects personal preferences and cultural interpretations of language.

Adeimantus
Messages
112
Reaction score
1
"Brights"? WTF?

Anyone else find the suggestion of Richard Dawkins and Dan Dennett, two of my favorite contemporary thinkers, that philosophical naturalists should anoint themselves "Brights" to be utterly repulsive? What's wrong with the old-fashioned and neutral "Freethinkers"? What's funny about it is that their intent is to create a more positive image for us atheist types. Of course, the word "atheist" has a very negative connotation here in the States, so their point is well taken. But what could be more off-putting than meeting someone who refers to himself as a "Bright"? I'd have to suppress the impulse to punch them in the nuts. I mean, why don't we just get it over with and refer to ourselves as "The Elect"?


By the way, everyone should read Dennett's Breaking The Spell twice. I've only read it once and I need to read it again to get all the crunchy goodness out of it.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


I think I heard that somewhere. Yeah, that's pretty silly.
⚛​
 


While I appreciate the intent of having an umbrella term uniting all philosophical naturalists, I'm not crazy about the term "Bright". But at least they refer to non-Brights as "Supers" (for supernaturalists), not Dopes. :smile:

I like the terms scientific (or philosophical) naturalist and atheist (I use them to describe my own view, as appropriate). Freethinker is OK, too. A friend of mine uses "post-theological". :wink:
 


I prefer being secure enough in my own beliefs or lack thereof that I don't worry about finding names to assign to myself or my beliefs.

The funny thing about the term "brights" is that it doesn't even conjure up the thought of intelligence when I hear it. Rather, I think bright blinky lights (like the old toy Lite Brite...I think that's how it was spelled). It conjures up thoughts of new agey, ditzy people who like pretty, shiny things like crystals. I guess their efforts backfire on people like me. :rolleyes:
 


I personally don't wish to be labeled. I guess if I had to be "classified" as to if I think there is a god, people would label me an atheist. Truth is, I really don't care or think about gods or religion unless someone shoves it in my face.

I really don't like the term "brights". I feel the term would understandably cause anyone religious to bristle. It's just begging to stir up a confrontation.
 


Terms such as "atheist" can be very useful in making one's position clear. What I really don't like is all the waffling and hemming and hawing when asked a simple question.

Q: Do you believe in god(s)?
A: Nope. Not even a little. I'm an atheist.

That's all, in its most fundamental usage, that the term atheist means. Simple, clear, unambiguous. (Of course, I'm no politician. :wink:)
 


Is 'philosophical naturalist' a synonym for atheist?
 


DaveC426913 said:
Is 'philosophical naturalist' a synonym for atheist?
No. Philosophical naturalism is much more than simple atheism, but all philosophical naturalists would be atheists, at least as I use the term. (I would imagine that a small subset of "atheists" may have all sorts of wacky views inconsistent with philosophical naturalism.)
 


Moonbear said:
The funny thing about the term "brights" is that it doesn't even conjure up the thought of intelligence when I hear it. Rather, I think bright blinky lights (like the old toy Lite Brite...I think that's how it was spelled). It conjures up thoughts of new agey, ditzy people who like pretty, shiny things like crystals. I guess their efforts backfire on people like me. :rolleyes:

I read the thread title and thought, "What? A conversation about car headlights?"
 
  • #10


Well, "bright" is synonymous to "intelligent" in Britain so that could be an explanation for the choice of the word.
 
  • #11


Darkiekurdo said:
Well, "bright" is synonymous to "intelligent" in Britain so that could be an explanation for the choice of the word.

Well, yes, "bright" is a synonym for intelligent or clever on this side of the pond too. However, at least where I live, as soon as you add an "s" on the end of "bright" then you're talking about a feature in car headlights.:biggrin:
 
  • #12


GeorginaS said:
as soon as you add an "s" on the end of "bright" then you're talking about a feature in car headlights.:biggrin:
My first thought too.