So, are you a Bright? - pipTalk Forums

How to Join	Member's Area	Private Library	Search	Sanctuary		Login
Main Forums	Discussion	Tech Talk	Mature Content	Archives	A home without a wall, Our haven without ends, A circle we all call Our Family of Friends!

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

0 posted 2003-09-29 07:19 PM

Haven't met an atheist (personally) yet who really likes this, but thought I'd throw out the link:

http://www.the-brights.net/

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant

since 1999-12-21

Posts 5767
Southern Abstentia

1 posted 2003-09-29 08:15 PM

Interesting Brad. But, I'm not too wild about it either.

I think the term is divisive. If you're not a naturalist you're not Bright? I don't, and have never, thought humanism, agnosticism, atheism, naturalism requires poselytizing to begin with.. but, if people want to form a club that's great.

Why add insult to injury though by mocking the world of faith with such a name?

Ringo

Member Elite

since 2003-02-20

Posts 3684
Saluting with misty eyes

2 posted 2003-09-29 08:43 PM

"skepticism, atheism, agnosticism, secular humanism, objectivism, rationalism, igtheism, naturalism, secularism, Humanism, scientism."

After having read most of the site (an being an avowed believer), I must once again fall back on the words of the all-too-late, and everymore great John Lennon...
"I don't believe in 'isms', I just believe in me." Only, in this case I also believe in my own spiritual higher power.
Just my thoughts, though ,and I will leave them to theirs.

We are all equal but we’re individually different
and able to reach the impossible if we try.

Brad
Member Ascendant

since 1999-08-20

Posts 5705
Jejudo, South Korea

3 posted 2003-09-29 11:33 PM

Yeah, I suppose it is divisive. The funny thing is that both Dawkins and Dennet stress that it is not intended to be that way (It's intended to be used in the same way that Gay has been used by the, well, Gay community). Yet, neither is above the fact of using it in a divisive way.

Example: And maybe someday we'll even have a Bright president.

I don't know. Certainly, there is such a thing as discrimination against Atheists, tremendous peer pressure to believe in God or something like God, but most Brights I know are much interested in distancing themselves from the inevitable comparisons between theism and atheism. This bring it closer.

Stephanos

Member Elite

since 2000-07-31

Posts 3618
Statesboro, GA, USA

4 posted 2003-09-30 10:07 PM

Looks like the optimist's club for naturalism.

It is difficult to minimalize the differences between naturalism and theism when statements like these are in view.  And while promoting peace and common ground to work toward is one thing, obscuring the basic presuppositions involved is quite another.  Although there is a negative sheen on the concept of "proselytizing" ... We all give reasons for why we believe the way we do.  We are all proponents of one basic worldview or another.  And I feel that is a good thing.  Whatever one believes, it should be believed because it has merit and truth.  But once the theist and the naturalist begin to defend or promote what they believe, it is then impossible to hide the real distance between them.  And I think people should make such inquiry into matters, so that more than surface statements are discussed.

It's a good thing to make statements, otherwise ideas are not tested.  But yeah, the club-like name "Brights" is kind of corny.  But neither is religous history devoid of stupid names or even flimsy commercialism to promote ideas.

Stephen.

[This message has been edited by Stephanos (09-30-2003 10:12 PM).]

	⇧ top of page ⇧
All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format.