girlwriter

Well said emotional.

Toto

You had to have been there, at the AAI convention in Florida. Dawkins was a scheduled speaker. He was in a different time zone and sleep deprived, and surrounded by people who adored him. Mynga Futrell and Paul Geisler, who have done a lot for the humanist movement and are well liked and respected, gave a presentation with PowerPoint (tm) slides, appealling to our common sense of frustration at being so fragmented and powerless, and suddenly otherwise rational people were signing up to be part of this new movement.

It just shows that even the most rational among us are social animals and susceptible to well crafted propaganda.

Viti

They spoke to our local chapter of the AHA, but I was unable to attend. Apparently their presentation is enough of a pep rally to suspend cynicism. I am almost glad I was unable to attend the meeting....I had assumed they would speak about their work in education and was upset at first.

ashe

Menat is an awkward term that will be unfamiliar to people. In this way it is actually worse than bright because it doesn't have that familiarity. Metist is not too bad because people are used to the idea of [some root word] + ist.

Perhaps we could try: (in no particular order)

menatist (adding -ist to menat)

simplist (one who prefers simple, rational explanations for natural phenomena)

naturalist (one who professes metaphysical naturalism. May require explanation if you frequent artistic venues? seems okay other than that.)

reasoner (we could take over the term reasoner, perhaps. how often do you hear someone say 'reasoner'? There used to be a magazine called 'The Reasoner' (in 1853!) which supported an atheistic worldview so it wouldn't be unreasonable. The main problem with this is that it implies that other people are unreasoners. hehe Well they are! :P Okay okay. But think.. the believers make us unbelievers and that to most people is negative. Being an unreasoner should be negative as well. Just don't shout "you're an unreasoner you moron"... Let people figure it out themselves. The good thing about reasoner is that most people will understand what it means; as the new capitalized version becomes more popular, people will quickly assimilate it. ie, 'Reasoner'. one who approaches the world only through Reason.)

freethinker (was probably an attempt at ditching the term atheist... Somehow the brights think they can succeed where freethinker failed. )

Perhaps I'll come up with more later.. hungry.

Ashe

pz

I still don't see why anyone is looking for a new word. Atheist is good. It's short, simple, and we can use it to detect the theists because they all misspell it.

sodium

What do people think of Humanist as a better alternative than Bright? I know it doesn't mean exactly the same thing, but it seems to me that for the purpose of building an effective movement among people with a naturalistic world-view, Humanism is the best current alternative.

Viti

Bright was supposed to encompass all non-believers whereas not all are Humanists. I am a Humanist, but I know many atheists who aren't

Farren

I'm a secular humorist and a nonbeliever and I'm awfully bright, but I don't want to go around trumpeting the fact

ashe

But all naturalists could be described as Reasoners.

Let's try examining 'Reasoner'. I already like it. It isn't as short as Bright but I think it is more meaningful.

Reasoner: n. A person who exclusively employs reason and the scientific method in dealing with his or her experience, excluding any supernatural explanations for all phenomena.

etc etc. This definition can certainly be reworked. It's at least a little better than Bright.

Shake

Well, if there's to be a new term, I think this one is the best. Certainly better than *shudder* Unifiers.

Although to me, it doesn't seem that much different from freethinkers. Actually, the above definition would seem to fit for some scientifically-minded folks who are still theists.

Yeah, I think I'll stick with being a humanist atheist.