NOT SO BRIGHT: I’m not at all sympathetic with Dennett’s proposal for “brights” (i.e., naturalists) to “come out of the closet” – even though I’m very sympathetic with much of what he says philosophically, e.g., about consciousness and intentionality. For one, it seems silly on its face to form a political coalition around holding certain metaphysical beliefs, as if Wittgensteinians of the world should unite in support of their metaphysical agenda (“we demand all Supreme Court nominees to say where they stand on the private language argument”). But Brights pushing for political clout is, more importantly, a political blunder.

The idea motivating Dennett’s piece seems to be an implicit equation between non-Brights and illiberal political opinions, or to put it more bluntly, an association of religious believers with right-wingers. But this is a mistaken assumption. In fact, my sense is that many religious believers, especially from the more liberal denominations, might even be sympathetic to Dennett’s metaphysics, preferring to see the church as an important moral resource, or a place to find comfort, rather than an imposer and enforcer of an arcane cosmology (though some may see this as decline of religion, rather than its further evolution). Richard Rorty’s recent distinction between being an atheist and being an “anticlericalist” is helpful in this regard – it enables us to distinguish between the many moral and progressive functions a parish might serve and a larger church establishment which does often mobilize itself in favor of non-progressive causes.

By coming out as a Bright, and forcing the issue over theological beliefs, one misses the chance to create coalitions with non-Brights, around moral issues which both agree on. Because if we can agree on those, then we can keep our other differences as “merely theological” or “merely metaphysical.” The rub, of course, is if there is some essential connection between one’s cosmology and one’s political and ethical positions. If that’s the case, then there’s no way we can put off the war of cosmologies for another day. But I doubt that this is the case, and I think that, to a significant degree, the hope of a liberal democracy depends on the ability of participants to put off metaphysical questions in order to debate and discuss and form coalitions on moral and political issues. Dennett is wrong to try to provoke such a metaphysical battle between Brights and non-Brights.

- posted by Chad @ Sunday, July 13, 2003