.gif){kind=logo}
I spoke with Mynga Futrell, co-founder and director of the Brights movement, at the Atheist Alliance International 2009 convention, and she talked about some of the frustrations she's felt concerning the reticence of many in the atheist community to adopt the Brights moniker, and what she sees as a lack of emphasis of nonbelievers' role in civics, versus focusing only on battling religion.
She also emphasized neutral education of world religions that she sees as sorely lacking in American schools, and promoted the Brights' initiative to offer a little help to teachers on that end.
There was no doubt that the Brights table was quite bereft of visitors most of the conference, which disappointed me as a registered Bright myself (along with Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Hemant Mehta, Steven Pinker, and many others), but I also think that if the Brights approach adoption from the standpoint of "being an atheist is too stigmatizing," they will continue to have trouble, as most momentum that I've seen is on the side of pushing broad acceptance and pride in the a-word (save for Sam Harris, who doesn't want to be known as anything). They will have to sell themselves as an augmentation, a clarification, much as the term "humanist" is, if they wish to woo more atheists to their particular cause.
I, for one, wish them success.
Oh, and you must, must, must see Daniel Dennett's talk from the 2007 AAI convention in which he discusses being a Bright, and suggests the name for all non-Brights: "Supers." Excellent stuff.
Related Secularism Examiner Articles:
- How Secular Student Alliance gives young nonbelievers a community and a voice (video)
- Surly Amy sells secular ceramics by the skeptics' symposium (video)
- Brother Richard on losing faith and gaining community (Video)
Comments
"Bright" has never been my favorite term for atheist. It carries an air of unnecessary arrogance with it that reminds me of the smug mug-shot Austin Cline's posts of himself on his blog. Austin is a terrific blogger and a strong thinker, but his photo looks way to mush like the term "Bright" sounds... Can you say, "lemon?"
Thanks for sharing this with the Atheist Nexus group! I've never seen "atheism" as stigmatizing, but as rather limited in focus. There are things beyond religion that atheism cannot address, but that Brights can. I for one wish the Brights would be more vocal and have stronger leadership, because I would love to be able to join my own voice and actions together with everyone else to a greater degree than I am now.
"The Brights"? Never heard of them before and looking at their website I'm underwhelmed. Frankly, I think their biggest problem is the name. Sounds like a cartoon name like "The Incredibles".
Nerd - any reason you can't be part of that stronger leadership?
I disagree with the basic premise of "brights".
The major growth in atheism is in refusing to feel ashamed, not in cowering behind a different label.
As to neutral education in world religions - its a pipe dream. You have religious people in the teaching professions, and even the non-religious have biases, so simply on the logistics of it you are asking for trouble.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!