I am a big fan of fanatics

[Bereta_Eder]

for example one can say "i'm fanatic with human rights" meaning he is utterly devoted to do anything to protect them. let's say he works in the UN.

if what he does, despite his intentions, is actually damaging human rights issues in some country and he doesn stop to think what's he's doing then he's a fanatic and actually he does the opposite of what he is saying/believing. so a fanatic won't necessairily "make the wind blow"

[Jon Miller]

you are applying your own views of fanatics to your definition, which are all negative

the person in your example doesn't become a fanatic unless he screws up, that has nothing to do with the definition however (and makes the discussion boring)

if he is utterly devoted to protecting human rights, than he is a fanatic, no matter whether he screws up or not

Jon Miller

[Bereta_Eder]

the person has always been a fanatic.

the point about wether he screws up or not was to demonsrate that fanatics dont necessairily "make the wind blow". they can be as damaging or "not moving things" as anyone else

[Jon Miller]

and I agree with you that a fanatic won't neccesarily make the wind blow

many are not made for it/ screw up

but they are the only ones who can make it blow

I also agree that there are different levels of conviction, but that just dictates when they join the cause

someone who has strong convictions jumps on the wagon when there is a just a bit of motion, but he won't start the wagon moving

Jon Miller

[dannubis]

you're fanatical about your definition of fanatic...

[Jon Miller]

because it is the correct one

JM

[Sikander]

Jon Miller loves Civ Fanatics !

[Jon Miller]

actually I never go there

JM

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject"--Winston Churchill

Beat me to it.

I will tell you that a number of scientists are fanatics

Only bad scientists can't change their minds.

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
because it is the correct one

JM

Says you, but you are only half-right.

.

[Jon Miller]

I agree that only bad scientists can't change their minds

but some good scientists are very firm beleivers in their own ideas, they sort of need to be especially if their ideas are revolutionary (and not obvious)

basically I disagree with Mr Churchills definition and prefer the one above it

"a fanatic is marked by excessive enthusiasm for and intense devotion to a cause or idea"

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by curtsibling


Says you, but you are only half-right.

.

says dictionary.com and other places

it also makes sense as a definition, and is clearly different than other definitions (at least that I know of)

if you have anoher word that means what I am trying to convey, please tell me and I will expand my vocabulary (But will probably still say sucj things about Fanatics to cause discussion)

JM

[Jon Miller]

for example.. Einstein is another example of a good scientist who stuck to his guns ("God doesn't play dice...")

JM

[KrazyHorse]

Excessive is the operative word here.

When it came to QM, Einstein was a fanatic. And that detracted from him as a scientist.

When the evidence is telling you something must be so, then you should accept it as so and move on.

[Jon Miller]

but at times thing seem to be against you

but you are right (see Boltzmann)

and so a fanatic is needed in science, even

JM