I believe this is why Lord J (and myself, after comparing notes and confirming my suspicion that Bruce Lee believed the exact same thing) does not advocate the use of the word "Humanist." It is enough for man to be a freethinking, spirited, dreaming individual. Placing a label on it is like concentrating on a finger pointing to the moon. Don't stare at the finger, or you'll miss all that heavenly glory. Picard didn't prance around calling himself an archbishop of humanism; he merely lived. I suppose then the term "humanism" is merely a boat to get someone across to greater understanding, similar to the term "Jeet Kune Do." It is merely there to introduce the mind to something novel; once a person has matured, one discards the Jeet Kune Do label and begins truly living according to his or her own way.
As an aside, it's interesting that Bruce Lee's philosophy has virtually taken popular root once and for all in the form of "mixed martial arts", the official name for regular fighting in UFC. I say virtually because "Mixed Martial Arts" is still disconnected from the higher philosophies and lessons Bruce Lee was trying to get across. It's like "fighting" versus being an "artist of life." Well, whatever; Lee is still openly credited as the "father of mixed martial arts."
As a second aside, this does make me question the "bright" movement, of which Dawkins is a member. It's an effort to make the word "bright" a noun. Even with good intentions, it sounds like fancy elitism.