By definition I am a bright. However, I hate the name. Why are Brights not naturalists, which is more descriptive, accurate, and less cocky sounding. Where does the term come from and why do people like it?
Because some naturalists can be woo slinging super naturalists, I use non-super-naturalists more often, although it would suggest like the atheist theist dichotomy, a negative positioned as a positive. But it is clearly not a negative. We are both umbrella and unstigmatized definition, proactive, positive, expansive and inclusive. There are those who wield both dogma and stigma but it sticks not to Brightness. We are resilient.
There is a battle within the non-believer spectrum for both territory and doctrine. Brights are not aloof but clearly above all that.
I usually say, if the only criticism people can offer is that the name is unattractive (which it isn't, it's quite luminous), then our detractors don't understand the underlying principals or are attempting to confuse non-supernaturalist into paying for memberships in their organizations when we just are and everyone only needs to be and do it together.
A word (est.) takes 20 years to be transformed and accepted in it's new usage. I have no problem waiting for the adjective to become a noun. We even reserve the right to change it as we are self defined and self designated. Words are place holders. We exist. I just smile and wave at the critics. Suckers.
We are the most inclusive definition of non-believers in the world. We are are continually expanding and suffer almost now attrition. Our habitual and destructive competitors, from within and without cannot say that.
The others fall short and compete for what is a natural existence.
I like the term Brights for people who don't believe in anything supernatural, and Supers for those who do. It's very descriptive. But a lot of Supers don't like it, and I can kind of understand. Someone mentioned what I think is the perfect alternative. They're Supers, we're Naturals. Easy to explain, makes perfect sense. :-)
Okay, I didn't take it in that fashion. There are a large number of alternatives being thrown around. You have won me on the cuteness of Natural. We also have Freethinker, Rationalist, Skeptic, Atheist, Secular Humanist, Bright, Naturalist and I am sure I am missing a few others. Each one has a slight difference in denotation and connotation but in general are all very very similar.
Yeah, you're right about that. I guess I like the term Natural because I wasn't what you'd normally call a Theist to begin with, and neither are most of my friends. But most of the people I know have a number of supernatural beliefs, from reincarnation and heaven to totem spirits and ghosts. I just want there to be an easy word to denote the fact that I'm finally free of all that stuff.
Naturalist is pretty cool, but it's already taken by those who study nature professionally. We don't want to piss off those park rangers. And nudists... ;-)
Well, we could just join the park rangers and nudists and all move into the woods naked to tend to them... no, I would miss my technology too much. Some people might confuse Natural with someone who likes Organic things... I would have to say I am against that as organic farming methods couldn't feed the planet and I kinda like mankind regardless of its seemingly endless amount of crazy, evil and stupid. We do have a lot of good things. Just think, you can say "I look at the Bright side of life".