hultberg.org: LinkLog

Richard Dawkins: I am a bright!

Richard Dawkins, author of among other things the interesting and amusing "The Selfish Gene" has written this article about how change of attitudes can start with raising consciousness around something that is wrong. How? By changing our language or way we use the language.

The feminists taught us about consciousness-raising. I used to laugh at 'him or her', and at 'chairperson', and I still try to avoid them on aesthetic grounds. But I recognise the power and importance of consciousness-raising. I now flinch at 'one man one vote'. My consciousness has been raised. Probably yours has too, and it matters.

A triumph of consciousness-raising has been the homosexual hijacking of the word "gay". I used to mourn the loss of gay in (what I still think of as) its true sense. But on the bright side (wait for it) gay has inspired a new imitator, which is the climax of this article. Gay is succinct, uplifting, positive: an "up" word, where homosexual is a down word, and queer, faggot and pooftah are insults. Those of us who subscribe to no religion; those of us whose view of the universe is natural rather than supernatural; those of us who rejoice in the real and scorn the false comfort of the unreal, we need a word of our own, a word like 'gay'. You can say 'I am an atheist' but at best it sounds stuffy (like 'I am a homosexual') and at worst it inflames prejudice (like 'I am a homosexual').

Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell, of Sacramento, California, have set out to coin a new word, a new 'gay'. Like gay, it should be a noun hijacked from an adjective, with its original meaning changed but not too much. Like gay, it should be catchy: a potentially prolific meme. Like gay, it should be positive, warm, cheerful, bright.

Geisert and Futrell are very insistent that their word is a noun and must not be an adjective. 'I am bright' sounds arrogant. 'I am a bright' sounds too unfamiliar to be arrogant: it is puzzling, enigmatic, tantalising. It invites the question, 'What on earth is a bright?' And then you're away: 'A bright is a person whose world view is free of supernatural and mystical elements. The ethics and actions of a bright are based on a naturalistic world view.'

You mean a bright is an atheist?

Well, some brights are happy to call themselves atheists. Some brights call themselves agnostics. Some call themselves humanists, some free thinkers. But all brights have a world view that is free of supernaturalism and mysticism.

Oh, I get it. It's a bit like 'gay'. So, what's the opposite of a bright? What would you call a religious person?

What would you suggest?

Of course, even though we brights will scrupulously insist that our word is a noun, if it catches on it is likely to follow gay and eventually re-emerge as a new adjective. And when that happens, who knows, we may finally get a bright president.

Guardian Unlimited Books | Review | The future looks bright

Update: For some strange reason a lot of people have been searching for "Dawkins", "bright" and similar words and ended up here. I guess the Dawkins article has created interest somewhere.

It would be interesting to know with whom and why they arrive at this page.

Random fortune brought to you by www.fortunes.nu:

:: ()