<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Saturday, July 12, 2003

In the beginning was the word, and the word was Bright? 

Yet another op-ed from the New York Times. Daniel Dennett writes about the need for agnostics, atheists and non-believers to come out of the closet and proclaim themselves as a large minority. I have often thought about this. I know I dont move in circles that can be considered representative of the population-at-large, but I'd say a good 90 per cent of my friends have a very healthy disrespect for religion. I am guessing my friends arent the only "brights" (Dennett's term for it) out there.

Most brights don't play the "aggressive atheist" role. We don't want to turn every conversation into a debate about religion, and we don't want to offend our friends and neighbors, and so we maintain a diplomatic silence. But the price is political impotence. Politicians don't think they even have to pay us lip service, and leaders who wouldn't be caught dead making religious or ethnic slurs don't hesitate to disparage the "godless" among us.

Dennett also suspects there might well be brights among the clergy as well. Interesting, given the current flap in Denmark over the suspension of Thorkild Grosboll, a pastor who saw no contradiction in his being a pastor and denying any belief in God, Virgin Mary etc. For their part, the good priests parishioners support him vigorously and some even threaten to leave the church if Grosboll remains suspended. Absolutely reaffirms my belief in the incredible progressiveness of the Scandinavian countries.

Foy my part, I am not sure I like "bright" more than agnostic. I'll have to think about it for a while.