I think most people have heard the phrase, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” This phrase can be applied to many things, but none more so than when defining the differences between science and religion.

Scientists dazzle the world’s population with factual brilliance while evangelists and those who proselytize in favor of their particular god can barely manage to baffle the public with fictional bullshit.

A theist’s lack of facts, or a brilliant explanation for the inconsistencies scattered throughout their favorite guide book, can only win over their public with undiluted bafflement and outright lies. Bafflement is the method that theists use to discredit science using the term theory. Sadly, there is more than one definition of the term theory. The one-hundred percent acceptance by scientists and those who understand and place great value on scientific research use this definition:

Theory – a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Theists, on the other hand, use their skills with twisting words and historical facts by adhering to this definition:

Theory – a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of fact.

 I think we can all agree on the term “brilliance,” but less so with the term “bafflement.”

Baffle – to confuse, bewilder, or perplex:

Bafflement is not only a source of strength and the modus operandi of the evangelistic theists, it’s also used successfully by con men and politicians. “There’s a fool born every day” or this quote from Mark Twain that explains the difficulty in “converting” a theist from his fantasies: “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they’ve been fooled.”

I think this conflict of words applies to fiction writing, as well. One can dazzle the reader with brilliance by insuring verisimilitude (a sense of reality), from characterization to individual scenes and plot lines, or baffle the reader with scenes and characters that are simply unreasonable or lack any sense of reality.

Dazzle or baffle; that is the question. Where am I on this? I prefer the dazzle of science and complete verisimilitude in writing; and I will call out bafflement whenever and wherever I encounter it.