[FoRK] Democracy is for Brights

Stephen Williams sdw at lig.net
Sun Mar 4 19:08:17 PST 2012


Are you sure it "doesn't mean 'smart people"'?
I take as a secondary meaning: intelligent, learned, and open minded critical thinker.  I expect any clear analysis to find high 
correlation.

Apparent coinage to Richard Dawkins (who also coined "meme"):
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bright/bright_index.html
http://the-brights.net/

Probable most correct definition:


  What is a bright?

  * A bright is a person who has a naturalistic worldview
  * A bright's worldview is free of supernatural and mystical elements
  * The ethics and actions of a bright are based on a naturalistic worldview


sdw

On 3/4/12 4:35 PM, Gmail wrote:
> Isn't "Brights" a marketing term for atheism? It doesn't mean "smart people."
>
>
>
> On Mar 4, 2012, at 14:06, Stephen Williams<sdw at lig.net>  wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Compensating mechanisms include: relying on past success (military, business, governmental management), relying on opinions&  endorsements of those you admire, following the group.  Sometimes that enhances your choice, sometimes not.  The rise in blatantly dishonest talk radio (Rush) and TV/"News" (Faux(non-local Fox)) seems directly aimed at co-opting these mechanisms to encourage poor choices.  Sad.  While there have been disinformation campaigns before, these are particularly well polished and consistent.  It seems their discredit is growing slowly though.  The only analog in the US at similar scale was religious organizations, some of which have now been discredited and diminished quite a bit.  (Listen to Catholic leaders about sex much?)
>>
>> sdw
>>
>> On 3/4/12 1:43 PM, Jeff Bone wrote:
>>> (For those not on the other relevant lists;  this has been making the rounds.  Cf. Bryan Caplan.)
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/people-arent-smart-enough-democracy-flourish-scientists-185601411.html
>>> People Aren't Smart Enough for Democracy to Flourish, Scientists Say
>>>
>>> By Natalie Wolchover | LiveScience.com – Tue, Feb 28, 2012
>>> The democratic process relies on the assumption that citizens (the majority of them, at least) can recognize the bestpolitical candidate, or best policy idea, when they see it. But a growing body of research has revealed an unfortunate aspect of the human psyche that would seem to disp rove this notion, and imply instead that democratic elections produce mediocre leadership and policies.
>>>
>>> ...




More information about the FoRK mailing list