Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joshua Holloway on April 21, 2010 at 4:42am

see "The Pearlist Persuasion"

Permalink Reply by Charles Alexander Zorn on July 13, 2010 at 7:44am

The others are jealous!

I agree Galen!


Bright Cheers Evolving!

Charlie

Permalink Reply by Dr. Terence Meaden on March 14, 2010 at 2:20am

Re Paul Geisert's comments above: Never have the Brights claimed superior intelligence to supers ("supers" are Daniel Dennett's suggestion in "Breaking the Spell" -- they are individuals who believe in supernatural forces).

I don't think much of Daniel Dennett's abbreviation "supers" for those who believe in supernatural forces.
They are better called "super-nats" or "super-gnats" because of super-gnat brains.

Brights may not claim superior intelligence, but many super-gnats think that is what Brights are doing.

Permalink Reply by DanDare on March 20, 2010 at 9:15pm

Its this "us and them" antagonism that the new term and underlying movement are trying to avoid. Sure, religion is ridiculous. Calling everyone who happens to have religious belief names just offends them and makes them dig in. Show them alternative ways of seeing and quite a few who have never thought about it much can be swayed. Especially if they don't think they are giving up culture and community, merely exchanging.

Permalink Reply by Joshua Holloway on April 21, 2010 at 4:43am

see "The Pearlist Persuasion"

Permalink Reply by Dale on July 13, 2010 at 2:45pm

It is true that many "super-gnats" think Brights are claiming superior intelligence. However it is difficult to attempt to have them understand our point of view when they do not understand our reasoning for not believing what they believe. It is difficult for me to understand their point of view as well, as I have never had such a belief... in any supernatural entity existing. I guess I was just always raised to be rational in that way.

Permalink Reply by Dale on July 13, 2010 at 8:09pm

I just used the term in response to Dr. Meaden's use.

Permalink Reply by sehkmet on August 11, 2011 at 7:27am

You just implied brights have superior intelligence by saying believers in the super natural have "gnat size brains."

I rest my case.

Permalink Reply by Davis Jacobson on August 11, 2011 at 8:23am

Policy #1:
"Brights should freely speak as Brights but, as they do, they must neither assert nor suggest that their views are representative of other Brights or that they are speaking for the constituency at large."

http://www.the-brights.net/action/activities/individual/writing/pol...

 

Meaden's rather unfortunate (in my view) and denigrating usage (and Dale's quote thereof) of the term "super-gnats" should not be taken as representative of any other bright or group of brights.  The Brights is meant to be a positive force in society http://www.the-brights.net/vision/principles.html  We should expect to get as good as we give, and I would think we'd all enjoy being afforded basic respect.

Permalink Reply by Il Gobb on April 30, 2010 at 10:23am

We had the Enlightment, so why not the Enbrightment? ;)

Permalink Reply by Jaume on April 30, 2010 at 10:48am

Remember this famous commercial from the 70's?

"Ultra Bright gives your mind...[bling]...sex appeal!"

Permalink Reply by Dr. Terence Meaden on April 30, 2010 at 11:55am

Or perhaps rather "Enbrightenment".

Now that is enlightening.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next ›
• Page