| rdfs:comment
| - The Brights movement is a social movement that aims to promote public understanding and acknowledgment of the naturalistic worldview. It was co-founded by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003. The noun bright was coined by Geisert as a positive-sounding umbrella term, and Futrell defined it as "an individual whose worldview is naturalistic (free from supernatural and mystical elements)". Daniel Dennett has since suggested that people that believe in supernatural should be referred to as 'supers'. This created the basis for a civic constituency to pursue the movement's three major aims:
- The Brights movement is a social movement that aims to promote public understanding and acknowledgment of the naturalistic world view. It was co-founded by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003. By definition a Bright is person having a natuarlistic worldview or whose worldview does not consist of supernatural elements. Bright is supposed to be a positive term unlike the word atheist. Homosexual is not as a cheerful term as gay. Words like infidel, heathen etc are insults. Philosopher Daniel Dennett has argued that if religious people find the term Bright offensive they must invent a positive term like super, people whose worldview consists of supernaturals.
- The Brights Movement was started in 2003 by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003 in order to assist in the advocacy of a naturalistic worldview. The Brights movement had a media campaign and was announced in Wired magazine (by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins), Free Inquiry (by Richard Dawkins), and on the New York Times op-ed page (by the philosopher and atheist Daniel Dennett). However, according to a 2004 Skeptical Enquirer article the movement the "Brights label reinforced a longstanding stereotype. Atheists already have a terrible rap for being coldhearted rationalists who attend Mensa gatherings and dismiss religious believers as simple-minded fools." In October of 2003 in a article in the Guardian Dawkins associated being a "bright" with being an intellectual.
|
| abstract
| - The Brights movement is a social movement that aims to promote public understanding and acknowledgment of the naturalistic world view. It was co-founded by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003. By definition a Bright is person having a natuarlistic worldview or whose worldview does not consist of supernatural elements. Bright is supposed to be a positive term unlike the word atheist. Homosexual is not as a cheerful term as gay. Words like infidel, heathen etc are insults. Philosopher Daniel Dennett has argued that if religious people find the term Bright offensive they must invent a positive term like super, people whose worldview consists of supernaturals. Brights strongly encourage one another to interact with people of different worldviews, whether they are theists, supers, or brights. They believe that neither is to be socially denigrated or personally disadvantaged simply for being persons whose worldviews are differently grounded. (Conduct is another matter - that which violates secular law, for example). The ideal is a fair foundation for all citizens, whatever their worldviews may be. The noun Bright is spelled with the B capital unlike the adjective bright. Calling atheists Bright doesn't make one bright. (Bright here means intelligent) Despite this intelligent people are more likely to recognise that religion doesn't make sense) Similarly being a homosexual does not make one gay (happy).
- The Brights movement is a social movement that aims to promote public understanding and acknowledgment of the naturalistic worldview. It was co-founded by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003. The noun bright was coined by Geisert as a positive-sounding umbrella term, and Futrell defined it as "an individual whose worldview is naturalistic (free from supernatural and mystical elements)". Daniel Dennett has since suggested that people that believe in supernatural should be referred to as 'supers'. This created the basis for a civic constituency to pursue the movement's three major aims: 1.
* Promote public understanding and acknowledgment of the naturalistic worldview, which is free of supernatural and mystical elements. 2.
* Gain public recognition that persons who hold such a worldview can bring principled actions to bear on matters of civic importance. 3.
* Educate society toward accepting the full and equitable civic participation of all such people. The brights movement has been formed as an Internet constituency of individuals. Its hub is The Brights' Net website, but individuals have autonomy to speak for themselves. As of 2009, the Brights' Net's tagline is: "Illuminating and Elevating the Naturalistic Worldview".
- The Brights Movement was started in 2003 by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003 in order to assist in the advocacy of a naturalistic worldview. The Brights movement had a media campaign and was announced in Wired magazine (by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins), Free Inquiry (by Richard Dawkins), and on the New York Times op-ed page (by the philosopher and atheist Daniel Dennett). However, according to a 2004 Skeptical Enquirer article the movement the "Brights label reinforced a longstanding stereotype. Atheists already have a terrible rap for being coldhearted rationalists who attend Mensa gatherings and dismiss religious believers as simple-minded fools." In October of 2003 in a article in the Guardian Dawkins associated being a "bright" with being an intellectual. Notable skeptics and atheists may still embrace the Brights Movement and are listed as "Enthusiastic Brights" at the Brights Movement website. Examples of individuals listed as Brights are notable skeptics/atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Margaret Downy, James Randi, Mel Lipman, Bobbie Kirkhart, Herb Silverman, Michael Shermer, Matt Cherry, and Babu Gogineni. Michael Shermer may not be a "enthusiastic Bright", as he stated in 2003 the following: "However, when it became apparent to me that the vast majority of people most likely to fall under the "bright" rubric would not use the label, I became, well, skeptical that it would succeed. For the time being I continue calling myself a skeptic." Shermer also wrote regarding the Brights movement the following: "The reaction was swift and merciless—almost no one, including and especially nonbelievers, agnostics, atheists, humanists, and free thinkers, liked the name, insisting that its elitist implications, along with the natural antonym “dim,” would doom us as a movement."
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)