Comments on: Why I love Randi, Part n

By: Barton Paul Levenson

Barton Paul Levenson — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:05:07 +0000

BA — thanks for your post. I’m sorry if I seem to be overly sensitive to this stuff. Been running into a lot of it recently.

-BPL

By: The Bad Astronomer

The Bad Astronomer — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:47:16 +0000

The term "bright" is dumb, divisive, and likely to make things harder, not easier, on skeptics. My thoughts on this are clear, and on record.

By: Barton Paul Levenson

Barton Paul Levenson — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 12:16:12 +0000

Mikhail Bragoria posts:

[[A bright is a person with a naturalistic worldview. ]]

Sorry, I don’t accept your (actually, Daniel Dennett’s) definition. In addition to being inaccurate, I think it’s arrogant and offensive.

By: Mikhail Bragoria

Mikhail Bragoria — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:16:16 +0000

Barton Paul Levenson – Not all atheists are brights. A bright is a person with a naturalistic worldview. Therefore, an atheist who believes in astrology is – by definition – not a bright.

By: Ronan Cunniffe

Ronan Cunniffe — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:51:03 +0000

Re: Brights
In practical terms, the intended meaning is less important than the meaning that will be taken up (and propagated) by opponents, and on that score, Barton’s point seems precisely correct.

“Bright”: the noun comes from the obvious adjective. Why WOULDN’T the antonym come from the corresponding adjective, and hence “Dim”?

Arguably what is needed is not a new noun, but a new verb. If you ask me if I believe that the universe is 13.7Gyo, I can’t say yes. I can explain my “no” answer by inquiring in turn whether you believe in oxygen, or in the floor, or (if you chose to ask me while at 30000ft) in Bernoulli’s Principle.

My mental stance on these topics is not that of belief. I either have knowledge of a particular field, or I don’t, and in no field is my knowledge either complete or final. I don’t do blissful certainty.

I admit I don’t have a suitable candidate verb. “I hold that….” “I understand that…”, “the consensus appears to be that….”

“I science that?”

In that case, obviously I would science that the universe is 13.7Gyo.

Ronan

By: peenworm

peenworm — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:48:20 +0000

> Jim — sure it was.

Well it’s good you know their intentions better than they do.

By: Monkey

Monkey — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:02:14 +0000

Responding to Barton Paul Levenson,
Should we get rid of the term “The Enlightenment”?

I also dont feel much affinity towards calling myself a ‘bright’ but I do realize that the manner of implication was not (although it could be taken as such – granted) to mean “smart” versus “stupid”.