Rejecting the Label "Brights": Why Freethinkers Disagree

  • Thread starter Adeimantus
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the suggestion of using the term "Brights" to refer to philosophical naturalists, instead of the term "Freethinkers". While the intention is to create a more positive image for atheists, the term is seen as off-putting and even comical. Some prefer terms like "scientific naturalist" or "atheist" to describe their beliefs, while others do not wish to be labeled at all. The potential for confrontation and ambiguity is also mentioned. The possible origin of the term "Brights" is debated, with some pointing out its synonymity with intelligence in Britain. However, others note that it is also a feature in car headlights.
  • #1
Adeimantus
113
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
  • #2


I think I heard that somewhere. Yeah, that's pretty silly.
⚛​
 
  • #3


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:
 
  • #4


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:
 
  • #5


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.
 
  • #6


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:)
 
  • #7


Is 'philosophical naturalist' a synonym for atheist?
 
  • #8


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.)
 
  • #9


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.
 

Related to Rejecting the Label "Brights": Why Freethinkers Disagree

1. What is the purpose of "Rejecting the Label "Brights": Why Freethinkers Disagree"?

The purpose of this article is to explore the concept of "Brights" and why it can be a divisive label among freethinkers. It discusses the reasons why some individuals reject this label and the implications of using it in the freethought community.

2. What is the definition of a "Bright" in the context of this article?

In this article, a "Bright" refers to someone who identifies as a freethinker and holds a naturalistic worldview. This term was coined by Richard Dawkins as an alternative to labels such as "atheist" or "agnostic."

3. Why do some freethinkers reject the label of "Bright"?

Some freethinkers reject the label of "Bright" because they believe it creates a sense of elitism and exclusion within the freethought community. They argue that it implies that those who do not identify as "Brights" are not rational or intelligent. Additionally, some freethinkers prefer to use more specific labels such as "atheist" or "humanist" to describe their beliefs.

4. What are the potential consequences of using the label "Bright"?

Using the label "Bright" can lead to division within the freethought community and alienate individuals who do not identify as such. It can also perpetuate the stereotype that freethinkers are arrogant and closed-minded. Additionally, it can hinder productive discussions and collaborations with those who hold different beliefs.

5. How can freethinkers promote unity and inclusivity while also expressing their beliefs?

Freethinkers can promote unity and inclusivity by respecting individual beliefs and avoiding labels that may create divisions. Instead of using a blanket term like "Bright," individuals can embrace the diversity within the freethought community and engage in respectful discussions and debates. It is important to remember that being a freethinker does not mean having all the answers, but rather being open to questioning and exploring different perspectives.

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top