I recently received the following, with regard to my endorsement of Brights (see the link at the bottom of the right column):
“[I’m] not sure about being a Bright though…its not healthy to believe there’s a clear answer to everything, or isn’t one at all.”
Because this not the first time a person has sincerely responded with concern at the term “Bright,” I decided to respond.
The following characteristics of Brights are set forth at http://www.the-brights.net/ [1] :
- A bright is a person who has a naturalistic worldview.
- A bright’s worldview is free of supernatural and mystical elements.
- The ethics and actions of a bright are based on a naturalistic worldview.
1) None of these principles requires that I have “a clear answer to everything.” I really don’t have a clear answer to most deep questions. Part of the reason I established this blog is therapeutic–it gives me a chance to bat things around with this blogging community, with the hope that we will get closer to the truth. What is truth? I see truth as a process, not a destination. I also see it a matter of working through many perspectives (though some seem more useful and functional than others).
2) None of these Brights principles requires me to believe that there “isn’t [a clear answer] at all.” I’m truly not a nihilist. I do think that we have some good solid knowledge about many things. It’s no small feat to develop a knowledge base that allows us to design planes that fly and buildings that stay up. On the big deep questions, though, I am also a big believer that we should have the courage to say “I don’t know” whenever there is insufficient evidence to carry us further. I’m not totally opposed to speculation, though. I love to speculate, but I try to label it as such whenever I engage in it. I’ve recently set forth some additional ideas regarding the limits of science, [2]however.
Brightness is a big tent. This worldview would include many atheists and agnostics to be sure, but it would also accommodate the beliefs of many people who would characterize themselves as spiritual or religious.
According to the Brights site [3], Brights include “a gamut of folks (Jews, Catholics, Quakers, Episcopalians) who maintain their religion’s cultural aspects but not its supernaturalism.”
The question, in my mind, is whether a person is willing to boldly step outside of the mainstream naturalistic worldview to assert supernatural beliefs to be literal truths. To the extent one does this, one would not qualify as a Bright.
In sum, I don’t claim clear answers to everything, nor do I claim that there are not any clear answers in life. My endorsement of the Brights is not meant to imply either of these things.
Print this post [4]
[5]