The reaction to the Brights movement has been (as with most movements) decidedly mixed. Clearly, there are many who are enthusiastic supporters of the movement. There are those who are utterly ambivalent toward it. And there are those who treat it with disdain.

For the most part, those in the last category have a beef with the very term itself: "bright." They consider it arrogant, as if we are saying that we Brights are intelligent and smart, and anyone who's not in agreement with our worldview is not bright, but dim, dull, or stupid.

Yes, the word "bright," as an adjective, can mean "smart" or "intelligent." But we're not using it as an adjective, but as a noun. As a noun, it has a totally different definition, one without opposite, in fact.

It's odd, though, that those who have a problem with this new definition apparently aren't too upset about the multiple definitions of other words, many of which are used as labels. Let's take a look at just one of them. Let's lop off the "b" from our new term. We're left with the word "right."

Right can mean:

Conservative - "He's a right-winger."

…And several more definitions.

So when a conservative refers to his views as those of "the right," why are non-conservatives not up in arms because that label implies that their own views must be held to be "wrong"? (And while I'm sure there are many conservatives who do believe this to be the case, it's beside the point.)

They're not up in arms because they know that, in this context, the opposite of "right" is not "wrong." If you're not of the right, you're possibly of the left, or somewhere else on the political playing field. Or off of it completely.

So to all the hyper-sensitive types out there who are getting bent out of shape over this harmless little word: Get Over It.

Words can and do have many definitions, and we understand what we really mean by the context in which they're used. This is just one more such term to the already huge number of them.

E-mail me!