Thursday, 4th of December, 2003

In this intelligent article on Butterflies and Wheels, Jeremy Stangroom (New Media editor of The Philosophers’ Magazine) argues that the brights, who are pushing the word bright to refer to people like me (who are atheists, believing the world is free of
supernatural and mystical elements, and basing their ethics on a naturalistic worldview), are misguided.

Despite my oh-so-favourite philosopher Dan Dennett jumping aboard (see this article for instance), I have to agree. I like the idea very much, but the word “bright” is so tied up with its meaning as “intelligent” that the whole project is done a real disservice. A more neutrally positive word would’ve done a better job.

4 Responses to “Not so Bright?”

1. acb says:
   December 4th, 2003 at 11:35 pm

   I always thought that the whole conceit of calling oneself a “bright” just made one look like an arrogant wanker, much like waving one’s MENSA membership card in people’s faces. It’s certainly not going to win the non-theists much public sympathy from the non-committed majority.

   People naturally resent those smarter than them, unless they have a great deal of self-effacing charm and tact. Or, as “Bob” said, “act like a dumbshit and people will treat you as an equal”.

2. Peter says:
   December 5th, 2003 at 12:09 am

   Yep, all the while knowing in your head that, dammit, you’re just smarter than the lot of them!

   This is exactly the problem with the term “bright”. I prefer something like “scientific materialist”. “Naturalist” sounds a bit too much like “naturist”. Not that I have any objection to nudity, and if any young atheist ladies wish to be naturists, far be it from me to… anyway.

3. Salvador says:
   December 8th, 2003 at 9:47 am

   I’m not against “bright”, really, but I personally find the term awkward. It has a meaning already, thanks. I prefer another term, that better expresses the fact that my beliefs are actually in touch with reality: sane. Of course, some might find that the apparent alternative — insane — is insulting.

4. Ms .45 says:
   January 21st, 2004 at 7:17 pm

   The other obvious thing to point out is that many hugely intelligent, intellectual people may be deeply religious (although I would suggest, not in a fundamentalist way), and plenty of fucking dumb shits are atheists/agnostics simply because they haven’t given it any thought and don’t give a fuck. I think I’m fairly “bright”, but I’m not an atheist because I’ve done any deep intellectualising, I’m an atheist because I was raised that way, and so were both my parents.

   (Also, just going slightly off-topic, I used to be in MENSA, and I fled because, although some of the members were indeed bright and interesting, most were thick as pigshit. IQ tests reward a particular type of linear, uncreative, uninteresting reasoning, and having a high one is something that MIGHT be symptomatic of intelligence in the same way that a suntan MIGHT be symptomatic of hard outdoor work - it’s much more likely to be a sign of being middle class.)