Printer Friendly

The founders respond.

"Brights" movement founders Mynga Futrell and Paul Geisert have begun responding to inevitable criticisms that if we call ourselves "Bright," we are obviously implying that everyone else is, well, less bright. In their online "Brights' Bulletin $4," Futrell and Geisert answer this objection with a degree of denial that would do the Vatican proud. In total seriousness they write:

   The most serious and common accusation is that, by using Bright,
   we are claiming that we are intelligent and that religionists
   are "Dims" or "Dulls." Brights must not foster or perpetuate
   this conceptual hangover from the adjectival form of
   "bright." ...  There exists no antonym for Bright.
   You might use [the term]the non-Brights. (1)

I cannot help sympathizing with critics of this movement who have suggested that the entire "Brights" campaign is either a Christian fundamentalist plot to make atheists look foolish or an elaborate hoax pertpetrated by the Onion.

Note

(1.) "Commentary from Mynga and Paul--'About the Word,'" "The Brights' Bulletin #4," an e-mail broadcast dated August 14, 2003, and archived at http://www.thebrights.net/broadcast _archive.htm@8/15/2003.

COPYRIGHT 2003 Council for Democratic and Secular Humanism, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2003 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Op-Ed
Author:Dowret, Arnell
Publication:Free Inquiry
Date:Dec 1, 2003
Words:182
Previous Article:Self-brighteousness.
Next Article:The tragedy of our time.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters