HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Jul23.194846.12902@news.cs.brandeis.edu>
	<1992Jul23.212023.1246@clarinet.com>
	<1992Jul23.220035.347@news.columbia.edu>
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:40:12

An atheist doesn't have to be someone who thinks he has a proof that
there can't be a god.  He only has to be someone who believes that
the evidence on the God question is at a similar level to the evidence
on the werewolf question.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 28 Jul 92 15:02:33 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <76691@ut-emx.uucp> yaron@anchor.as.utexas.edu (Mr. Sheffer) writes:
>In article <srutt.711951273@beagle> srutt@boulder.Colorado.EDU (DNA Kaifeng) writes:
>>an atheist is one who BELIEVES that 
>>God does NOT exist and an agnostic is one who is simply skeptical about
>>the existence of God.
>
>Gee. I wonder where do I belong in this scheme. I, for one, KNOW that GOD
>does not exist. Oh, silly me, I almost forgot. I am a REALIST.
>
>Ronny
>

God called me this morning to confirm this : s/he does not exist.

A joke?
The story of that newbie C programmer that decided to use C++ now.
So, he wrote a program and increase all letters of the files by
one, the cheapest C++ compiler indeed.

-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Barthelemy Jarret (1471) -> Andre Jarret, sieur de Beauregard (1665)
\_.-===   -> Denis Beauregard (1992)                  Opinions ? Et pis non !
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13446 misc.legal:15179 talk.politics.theory:3117
From: zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,misc.legal,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Hey, Mikhail, where ya goin' with that gun in
Date: 30 Jul 92 13:57:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Jul30.095715.14308
Distribution: na
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Jul30.094625.10055@eff.org> 
mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:

>In article <1992Jul30.024634.14306@husc3.harvard.edu>
>zeleny@husc9.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny) writes:

MZ:
>>The only honorable choice
>>open to me is to wither the unworthy sod with deadly ridicule.  You may
>>expect Mike Godwin to drop dead from my witty barbs within the next fifty
>>years.

MG:
>It's actually the frequency of the unwitty barbs that has me worried
>about my health. I'm not so worried about the witty ones.

Granted that even my sterling wit suffers from an occasional misfire,
still I may remain proud in the knowledge that at the very least I
don't lower myself to unkind observations of brute fact, like:

Mike Godwin has finally found an opponent of his own moral and
intellectual caliber in Edward G. Nilges.

>--Mike

Now that would be unsporting, wouldn't it?

>-- 
>Mike Godwin,     |"Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a law-
>mnemonic@eff.org | breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every
>(617) 864-0665   | man to become a law unto himself. It invites anarchy."
>EFF, Cambridge   |         --Brandeis, J., dissenting in Olmstead v. U.S.  

best wishes
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13137 alt.books.reviews:17
From: kassover@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,alt.books.reviews
Subject: Re: RAH
Date: 26 Jul 92 23:56:28 GMT
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center

In article <1992Jul24.130651@IASTATE.EDU> mcoffin@IASTATE.EDU (Marie Coffin) writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.163227.4521@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk>, ccaajmf@ucl.ac.uk (John
>Franks) writes:
...
>> 
>> By the way, it starts off with a nuclear holocaust and - among other things -
>> a "young, pretty, intelligent female" type character - much like any of the
>> ones in many of his other books - dies (with her child) in child-birth. This
>> really surprised me. 
>> 
>> Comments? Thoughts?
>
>I read Farnham's Freehold a long time ago, and liked it.  The plot is nicely
>worked out, tight, and interesting.  For some reason, it was never very
>popular.  

Spoilers follow.

I suppose transmogrifying the East vs West conflict into Black vs
White had something to do with it.

Farnham's daughter dies, in childbirth, after being congratulated
by Farnham for contributing to the survival of the freehold.

Farnham's son never amounts to much, in fact goes over to the
other camp, along with his mother, Farnham's wife.

Farnham takes up with a strange woman, while possibly being able
to have been considered as still married.

None of these is likely to be seen as wonderful, the issue of
nuclear war was too close to reality to be dismissed as escape
fiction, and none of the characters in _Farnham's Freehold_ is as
sympathetic as those in _Stranger in a Strange Land_


While we are at it, how many reading this went out and tried to
make ammonium tri-iodide from household chemicals, raise your
hands, please?

Those of you who actually succeeded, leave your hands up.
How many of you have all your fingers and eyes and things?

Thought so.
8-)


-- 
David Kassover             "Proper technique helps protect you against
uupsi!khazad!kassover	          sharp weapons and dull judges."
kassover@aule-tek.com                   F. Collins
kassover@ra.crd.ge.com
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Nuremberg Laws
Date: 28 Jul 92 23:29:27 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <BrwtC2.Cn8@world.std.com>, jfl@world.std.com (John Lovett) writes:
> Does anyone know of a book about the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, and their
> use to bar German Jews from the professions, and confiscate their
> property?  I'm interested in how Jews and others in Germany reacted,
> and how foreign countries reacted.

Leni Yahil's _The Holocaust_ (New York, Oxford University Press: 1990),
discusses the reaction of both the German Jewish community, and the 
Jewish community in the rest of the Western world reacted.  It's a
good start.

-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
"Well, maybe the Holocaust was right *for that culture*." -- a moral relativist
with whom I work.
From: westr@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Robert _FinnAgain_ West)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Great American Novel
Date: 31 Jul 92 01:42:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University

In article <1992Jul30.223813.24121@eff.org> mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes:
>In article <55530@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> westr@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Robert _FinnAgain_ West) writes:
>
>>	I don't know. Perhaps it's just my love-affair with _GR_, but
>>comparatively _Vineland_ was a serious disappointment. It felt like
>>the archetypal "rebel" novel.
>
>I think the difference in scope betwen GRAVITY'S RAINBOW and VINELAND may
>have led you to miss the subtlety and beauty of the latter book. In some
>ways, it's a more mature work.

	Perhaps you could illustrate this difference to me. This is
not meant in a sarcastic way, but in a genuine desire to hear your
thoughts on the subtlety of VINELAND. I suppose most of my frustration
with the work was in its cheeky tone. I recognize Pynchon's facility
with language, especially the argot-packed American -- this is
primarily why I have such profound respect for his work.

>I recently had the experience of reading a chapter aloud (a group project
>on the WELL to produce a read-aloud version of VINELAND for some blind
>WELL users). Pynchon's ear for the American tongue, which had always been
>uneven but occasionally brilliant, is consistently brilliant in VINELAND.

	Sigh... I wish just for one day the academy would let us read
something contemporary. Waiting for your (and others) reply.

Robert West              |Ideas of the Opposite: "Imagine a missile one
 English Department      |hears approaching only |after it explodes.  The
 Purdue University       |reversal! A piece of time neatly snipped out... a
------------------------ |few feet of film run backwards... the blast
westr@mace.cc.purdue.edu |of the rocket, fallen faster than sound--
	        	 |then growing out of it the roar of its own
America Online: 	 |fall, catching up to what's already
   FinnAgain    	 |death and burning . . . a ghost in the sky...
From: ramscar@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Ramscar)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re:  Great last sentences
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:12:28 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

John Meade Falkner's "The Nebuly Coat" ends with the tunes
played by the chimes of St Sepulchre's Church at Cullerne,
the last line being the 12 o'clock chime, "Mount Ephraim" 
(no spoiler here I hope).

Which gives me an opportunity to put in a plug for this
wonderful, and often sadly neglected, "detective" novel.

Michael
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
From: hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke)
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 01:09:58 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.132357.6141@pdnfido.fidonet.org> joeb@pdnfido.fidonet.org (Joe Beiter) writes:
>
>Thats assuming of course that *a* God can be patronized.  I don't know about
>the other religions you mentioned but in the Christian religion it is God
>who does the choosing.

R U EL1TE D00D????!!!!!
-- 
"What? Over? Did you say it's over? Nothing's over, till we decide it is! 
 Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!" --John Belushi
hucke@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu             _V_a_l_h_a_l_l_a BBS, 217-352-3682, WWIV4.21, 14.4k
From: mbvg9741@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (plain)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Young Adult Books
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:47:36 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

I love many young adult books, and just like "adult" books some are
sophisticated and some are banal.  As far as I can tell, the only
reason that some books are called Young Adult is that the publisher
figures it will sell better that way (probably meaning that it has
a young adult in a staring role).  Young Adult is not synomous with
lower quality, not even close.  Many of the books are beyound the
abilities of "adult" readers too.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13520 sci.skeptic:13441 talk.religion.misc:13096
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 31 Jul 92 00:14:07 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <CB.92Jul29131627@tamarack13.timbuk>, cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster) writes:
> Clayton Cramer writes:
#    Which prepackaged religions predicate "the Universe being roughly
#    6000 years old"?  I seem to have missed that one.
# 
#    Even many fundamentalist Christians don't subscribe to that notion, and 
#    certainly, most Christians of all stripes don't.  In any case, it
#    isn't part of the religion.
# 
# Hold on.  This theory has more support than you might think.  A priest
# in the 19th century tried to calculate the age of the earth by adding

Wrong century.  It was the 17th century.  Bishop Usher.

# all the lifespans of people in the Bible back to Adam and Eve.  The date
# he came up with for the beginning of the world was 4004 BC.  This date
# became suprisingly widely accepted and was printed in many editions of
# the Bible.  I think it had support among both Catholics and Protestants.

Not among most Catholics, or even most Protestants.

# And I don't think it has died out even now, even though we have
# *writing* from earlier than 4004 BC (not to mention 40,000-year-old art
# works, 165-million-year-old dinosaur bones, and far older fossils of all
# kinds).  Among several historical time-lines currently in print, one is
# a reprint of one done in the 19th century, which similarly traces
# history back to Adam and I think shows (or at least provides no reason
# to disagree with) the 4004 date.
# 
# Chris Brewster

I believe the time-line in question clearly labels this as a "traditional"
view.



-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
"Well, maybe the Holocaust was right *for that culture*." -- a moral relativist
with whom I work.
From: maverick@cs.berkeley.edu (Vance Maverick)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Great Western Novel [Re: Great American Novel]
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:09:15 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: CS Division, UC Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: cork.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Jul21.171402.8280@athena.mit.edu>, kamorgan@athena.mit.edu (Keith Morgan) writes:
|> 
|> I'd like to strike a note in defence of Jack London.
|> [strikes note]
|> 
|> That said, I'm curious about the comment about London not being what
|> the city of Oakland wishes he were. What would they like? I know there
|> are several monuments to London but do you mean that his politics are
|> distasteful to the city mothers, or what?

No, they just want to use his name for civic boosterism.  The failure of
the "Jack London Square" urban renewal project on the waterfront and his
faded reputation are a depressing combination.  (Oakland Chinatown, a few
blocks up Broadway, is bustling, if not exactly beautiful -- no thanks to
literature.)

Around here, we have to work pretty hard to get any literary glory to
reflect on us.  There's a handsome rococo house around the corner from
where I live in San Francisco with an enormous brass plaque proclaiming
that Arthur Conan Doyle stayed there; according to a guide to "literary San
Francisco", he visited for a few hours one morning.

Similarly, this guide sells Hammett pretty hard; they suggest comparisons
of his San Francisco to (predictably) Dickens' London and Joyce's Dublin. 
Now I like Hammett a lot, but I really don't think he was strong on local
color or visual detail.  I read many of his books and stories before I knew
the City at all, and they didn't suggest anything about how it looks or
feels.  For example, a story I reread recently (_The Gatewood Caper_)
involves the delivery of a ransom.  The ransomer walks down Clay Street,
and the detectives follow him along the parallel streets on either side,
Washington and Sacramento.  This is right in my neighborhood, so now I know
that this walk would be very different depending how far east or west one
started, and which direction one walked; no clue is given, and nothing in
the description would enable me to decide.  (That the ransomer lives in a
big house means it's probably Pacific Heights, but there are some on Clay
Street on Nob Hill.)  The story might as well *be* set in Dublin -- too bad
the writer the city is forced to celebrate neglected to celebrate the city.

|> BTW: London as a "northern" writer?

Perish the thought!  We need his reputation right here, such as it is....

|> Also, other "western" writers:
|> Wallace Stegner, Louis L'Amour, and Zane Grey.

Erle Stanley Gardner?  Armistead Maupin?  Don't forget that Robert Frost
was born in San Francisco.

	Vance
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Great last sentences
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<liam.056h@durie.amigans.gen.nz>
	<1992Jul24.155625.2819@newstand.syr.edu>
	<DLB.92Jul30144037@fanny.wash.inmet.com>
Date: 30 Jul 92 20:32:13

Great last sentence: "And for the first time in many years he crossed
himself".  (Pyervi raz cherez mnogo let, perekrestilsya.)

It's from "The Extraordinary Adventures of Private Ivan Chonkin" by
Vladimir Voinovich.  This won't be a spoiler, since it doesn't have
anything to do with the fate of the main character who has had a
Marxoid argument with his Marxist, Michurinist neighbor in which the
latter maintained that work was what made man human.  Chonkin then
asked about his girl friend's plow horse, which certainly worked.  At
the end of the book, which occurs just after the German invasion, the
neighbor finds the horse killed by a shell and attached to the horse a
piece of paper on which is written the much publicized slogan, "If I
perish, consider me a Communist".  (Yesli pogibnu, proshchu, schitat'
kommunistom.)

--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto)
Subject: Re: Gothic, Decadent books...
Organization: Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 02:24:00 GMT


mecca@acsu.buffalo.edu (Starkitty <Renee>) writes:

> I just recently read Bret Easton Ellis' Less Than Zero and found that I
> enjoyed literary dark demons in humans.. anyone have suggestions on what
> books I should read next?

LESS THAN ZERO -- Yuck!  Actually, I didn't hate it as much as I was
supposed to.

Dark demons in humans:

        WUTHERING HEIGHTS       Emily Bronte
        THE REBEL ANGELS        Robertson Davies
        LONDON FIELDS           Martin Amis

LONDON FIELDS has the darkest characters.  I'm sure many would not agree, but
I thing THE REBEL ANGELS has the most interesting characters.  What I love
about Davies is that his good characters can do wrong, and his bad characters
are capable of effecting good.


Mark


Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:12987 rec.humor:24465 talk.religion.misc:12633 sci.skeptic:13179 alt.atheism:14263
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard)
Date: 24 Jul 1992 11:19 MST  
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <srutt.711951273@beagle>, srutt@boulder.Colorado.EDU (DNA Kaifeng) writes...
>I've long been interested in the definition of atheist and agnostic. I've 
>heard a few, but I prefer this one: an atheist is one who BELIEVES that 
>God does NOT exist and an agnostic is one who is simply skeptical about
>the existence of God. So under this definition, only an agnostic can be
>a true scientist (of thought, not necessarily profession).

How does that follow?  Scientists have beliefs, even about the accuracy
of their theories--but they should simply be open to future revision.
Why can't one believe that no gods exist and still be open to the possibility
that one or more gods *might* prove to exist in the future?  
   I consider myself an atheist on the grounds that I think the arguments
for the nonexistence of gods are better than the arguments for the existence
of gods.  I do not, however, consider theists necessarily irrational or
discount the possibility of gods.

Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Dept. of Philosophy      Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
From:  (jmhodapp@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu)
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests - Pascal's Wager
Organization: haphazard, at best
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 21:02:43 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.164931.142181@cs.cmu.edu>, rudis+@cs.cmu.edu (Rujith S DeSilva) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Jul24.151332.19380@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk

> Anyway, here's the obligatory anecdote (for the benefit of rec.humor): Some
> philosopher/theologician, when questioned as to whether he believes in God,
> replied, [paraphrased] ``Either God exists or He doesn't.  Either I believe in
> God or I don't.  Of the four possibilities, only one is to my disadvantage.
> To avoid that possibility, I believe in God.''
> 
> BTW, could someone tell me who said the above?
> 
I believe you are refering to Pascal's Wager, in which he examined the risk/reward of believing
or not, and even if there is little evidence of God, the reward is so great (eternal bliss vs. 
eternal pain) it's better to believe.  The possible loss (a little prayer, worship, etc.. ) was not
as great as any other possible loss.  I will confirm the title this weekend, I read it 
 in "Aha! Gotcha", by Gardner"

Jon  jmhodapp@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu
===============================
"Is this any time to make enemies?" Voltaire, on his deathbed, on being told
to renounce Satan.


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: Re-reading (was RAH)
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:57:54 GMT

In article <5144@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
>
>I had the same experience with Burroughs, though in my case it was
>with his Mars books. As a kid, I loved the Barsoom books. About
>a year ago, I read several of them aloud to my daughter.  I
>was appalled at how bad the writing was.

What's amazing is how his writing changed after he started doing 
books like NOVA EXPRESS and NAKED LUNCH.


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,     |"Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a law-
mnemonic@eff.org | breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every
(617) 864-0665   | man to become a law unto himself. It invites anarchy."
EFF, Cambridge   |         --Brandeis, J., dissenting in Olmstead v. U.S.
From: frankt@cwi.nl (Frank Teusink)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Dickens vs. Twain
Date: 22 Jul 92 11:42:57 GMT

>rauser@fraser.sfu.ca (Richard John Rauser) writes:

>>   I've always seen a parallel between these two...both were late 19th
>> century novelists, both saw themselves as social prophets of a sort,
>> and both concerned themselves with their society's outcasts in their
>> novels.
>>   So who do you prefer?

Dickens. Definitely.
I've red "Great Expectations" and "David Copperfield", and liked them both.
I'm likely to read other titles of him in the future (any recommendations?).
I've tried to read "A Connecticut Yankee at King Arthur's Court", but got
stuck at about one-third of the book. I'd probably like the movie if they'd
make one (does one exist?), but if you don't really like the main character,
if other characters virtually don't exist, and if the story itself is rather
flat, there doesn't seem anything left to like about a book. If I've missed
something essential about the book (which is utterly possible (-:), I would
like to hear (read) about it. Furthermore, if there is some other book of
M. Twain I should read, then tell me.

Frank Teusink.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
In-reply-to: cramer@optilink.UUCP's message of 28 Jul 92 23:25:42 GMT
Organization: pubs
	<11455@optilink.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Date: 29 Jul 92 13:16:31 CDT

Clayton Cramer writes:

   Which prepackaged religions predicate "the Universe being roughly
   6000 years old"?  I seem to have missed that one.

   Even many fundamentalist Christians don't subscribe to that notion, and 
   certainly, most Christians of all stripes don't.  In any case, it
   isn't part of the religion.

Hold on.  This theory has more support than you might think.  A priest
in the 19th century tried to calculate the age of the earth by adding
all the lifespans of people in the Bible back to Adam and Eve.  The date
he came up with for the beginning of the world was 4004 BC.  This date
became suprisingly widely accepted and was printed in many editions of
the Bible.  I think it had support among both Catholics and Protestants.
And I don't think it has died out even now, even though we have
*writing* from earlier than 4004 BC (not to mention 40,000-year-old art
works, 165-million-year-old dinosaur bones, and far older fossils of all
kinds).  Among several historical time-lines currently in print, one is
a reprint of one done in the 19th century, which similarly traces
history back to Adam and I think shows (or at least provides no reason
to disagree with) the 4004 date.

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books