HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
Subject: Re: help please, when did Isaac Asimov die?
Date: 23 Jul 92 19:32:34 GMT
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University

From article <1992Jul22.201814.1938@linus.mitre.org>, by jon@cyclone.MITRE.org (J. E. Shum):
> 
> In article <1992Jul22.191303.20390@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>> jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:
>> : >>
>> : >>NOT Isaac!  He's up there raising H*** with someone!
>> : >>
>> : > 
>> : > Ah, a-hem, that would be *down* there.
>> : 
>> : But do atheists _go_ anywhere when they die?
>>  
>> I would not say that he was an atheist. More correctly, he just did not
>> accept any "Devine text" as literal truth. 
>> 
>> Bill
>> 
> 
> However, in his auto-biography, he did refer to himself as a "jewish
> atheist."
>

I think he mentioned being an atheist in one of his editorials in
"his" magazine.  'Course if he was wrong, either of the first 2
statements may be true.

"There is no good, scientific evidence for life after death.
However, there is no good scientific evidence against it either.
Why fret about it?  You'll know soon enough."

					L. Long 
-- 
"Land of song, said the warrior bard,           Jim Heath
Though all the world betrays thee.
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard, (The Minstrel Boy)
One faithful harp will praise thee."         (Thomas Moore)
From: cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: C.S. Lewis  (Re: Jumping to conclusions in r.a.b, etc.)
Date: 30 Jul 92 10:38:54 GMT
Organization: University of Keele, England

From article <1992Jul30.084529.18639@leland.Stanford.EDU>, by jchokey@leland.Stanford.EDU (James Alexander Chokey):
> 	Personally, I think Tolkien's Catholicism
			              ^^^^^^^^^^^		
please say *Roman* catholicism - overwise you concede the point.

> shows through at many points
> in his fictional work--  particularly in LOTR.

[A lot of deletion of points I agree with in the main]

>I even think there are some connections that can be 
> made between Galadriel and the Virgin Mary. Galadriel, of course, is neither
> particularly virginal or maternal-- but she does serve as a sort of protector,
> and even of an object of devotion.  (I'm thinking particularly of Frodo and
> Sam's calling upon of Galadriel during the Shelob episode, and of Gimli's 
> unusual devotion towards her.)

I think this has got to be right and is echoed in the Silmarilion -
where it's the chief female Valar (sorry  I've forgotten the right term)
who gets the praise not Manwe the male one. Her connection with the
stars as Elbereth seems to fit in with the Virgin Mary as the Queen of
the heavens (aka the goddess Isis - yes this *is* an anti-Roman Catholic
flame). It is Elbereth/Githoniel who the Elves and every one else calls on
throughout LoTR, which again reminds me at least of RC devotion to Mary.

Andy Fear, cla04@uk.ac.Keele
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13463 rec.arts.sf.misc:2290 alt.folklore.urban:20140 alt.religion.kibology:3273
From: anlyyao@igc.org (An-Ly Yao)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Nobel winners
Date: 20 Jul 92 15:34:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #R:netnews.upenn.edu:83155:cdp:1446700007:000:136
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!anlyyao    Jul 20 08:34:00 1992


Do Chinese writers have a fair chance? Does anybody here know Bo Yang or simi-
lar writers?

Goetz Kluge, Seoul, Korea, anlyyao@igc.org
From: wagner@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Whom Do the Intellectuals Serve?
Date: 27 Jul 92 15:50:12 EDT

In article <rauser.712197440@sfu.ca>, rauser@fraser.sfu.ca (Richard John Rauser) writes:
> jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
> 
>>As we all know, we intellectuals often disagree among ourselves.
>>In the present case, Gordon Fitch and I disagree about whether
>>the noble effort to save the South Vietnamese from the communist
>>invasion was what I said it was or was something else and whether
>>it was a good idea.  Every reader of r.a.b. will thank me for
>>not rehashing the arguments about that proposition.
> 
>    Look, John, no one's saying you aren't brilliant, and I'm sure we were
> all following your heated debate over Vietnam with intense fascination, but
> do you have any idea how arrogant it sounds to refer to yourself as   
> "we intellectuals"? Debate to your heart's content about whatever subjects
> you choose, but don't try and prove your intelligence by calling yourself
> an intellectual (and then proceeding for three pages to define the word
> in an attempt at justifying the label). 
> 
>     A little humility never hurt anyone...not even an "intellectual". 
>    
Perhaps he should have said "we the oppressed," or  "we the unwashed and 
unread?"  Really, can you come up with a meaningful definition of 
intellectual which would exclude Prof McCarthy?  How about one which 
would exclude the typical denizen of this forum?  I don't like his politics
much either, but I wouldn't characterize what he writes as arrogant or
apologetic.  

                                             -Luke
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: jfl@world.std.com (John Lovett)
Subject: Nuremberg Laws
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 20:09:35 GMT

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.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:12951 rec.humor:24417 talk.religion.misc:12608 sci.skeptic:13161
From: phucy@warwick.ac.uk (Gerry cafolla)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 24 Jul 92 11:35:09 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, Warwick University, UK

In article <1992Jul24.023430.6801@athena.cs.uga.edu> cadams@athena.cs.uga.edu (Clark Adams) writes:
>In article <3635@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul23.212023.1246@clarinet.com> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
>>	In other words, an agnostic is willing to read the evidence as
>>it appears; a TRUE atheist just WON'T believe, even if God Himself
>>were to come down and talk with him.
>>
>>
>>                                 Sea Wasp
>>                                   /^\
>                                    ;;;
>
>I think you are falling into stereotypes.  Atheism is a default position:
>the lack of belef in G/god/s.  Agnosticism is the position that the
>existence of G/god/s (and other supernatural stuff) is unknowable (usually
>improbable).  The two positions are not mutually exclusive. Most atheists
>(at least the hundred+ that I know ) would gladly believe in a god if
>it were proven that he/she/it/them existed.  To agree with Brad, most
>atheists are agnostics and vice versa if you take the words for their
>denotation and not their sterotypical connotation.
>
>THOUGHTfully Yours:
>Clark Adams
>cadams@athena.cs.uga.edu

I personally think that Agnostics just can't make up their minds !.
-- 
        ----------------------------------------------------------------
        -        Gerry Cafolla          -    No  job  is  ever too     -
        -                               -             small !!         -
        ----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: marcy@sqwest.wimsey.bc.ca (Marcy Thompson)
Subject: Re: Bathroom reading
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Surrey, British Columbia, CANADA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 18:37:48 GMT

In a recent rec.arts.books article, spb0457@zeus.tamu.edu (SubGenius) wrote:
>Mark Taranto writes...
>>betsyp@apollo.hp.com (Betsy Perry) writes (of M.F.K.Fisher):
>>> I like her translation of Brillat-Savarin; it's the ideal
>>> back-of-the-toilet book, amenable to non-chronological and
>>> interrupted reading.
>>I've always found Eliot's THE LOVE SONG OF J. ALFRED PRUFROCK to be
>>the perfect length for a shit.
>>Any other suggestions?
>>Mark
>+-----------------------------------------------SubG--------------------------+
>This is a subject that has much occupied my thoughts.
>
>On my bathroom reading wish list? A complete edition of Johnson's _Dictionary_.
>Or (while I'm dreaming) a complete edition of Sir Richard Francis Burton's 
>translation of _Thousand Nights and a Night_.

I have a not-yet-complete set of the Pantheon Folklore Library. 
Perfect bathroom reading, because they have stories of varying lengths,
so you can choose something appropriate to the situation.

My current volume is _Arab_Folktales_. Great stuff!
-- 

Marcy Thompson		
  SoftQuad (West)			
    marcy@sq.com
From: jw2b@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Sara J. Wagner)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re:  Great last sentences
Date: 27 Jul 92 20:44:18 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia


Not so much the last sentance as the way it was printed -- the
paperback version of Jonathan Carroll's _The Land of Laughs_ ended
with the last sentence exactly at the right margin, so you turned the
page thinking the paragraph went on.  Don't know about the hardback
version -- it would be interesting to know if this was deliberate.  It
certainly seemed to be deliberate, and greatly heightened the final
punch.

--
Jane Wagner, Computer Systems and Publications Assistant
The Claude Moore Health Sciences Library| INTERNET: jw2b@virginia.edu
Box 234, UVA Health Sciences Center	| PHONE:    804-924-0188
Charlottesville, VA  22908 		| BITNET:   jw2b@virginia.bitnet
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: athos@apple.com (Rick Eames)
Subject: Penguin Books in Bay Area
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 20:46:03 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: rec.arts.books

Hi, I am looking for a good store in the Bay Area that stocks not only lots
of Penguin Books, but also their Viking Portable Libraries.  I yearn for
that store in Cambridge, Mass that I visited a year ago....

I tried a store in Los Altos, but they really didn't have that much.

--
Rick Eames
athos@apple.com
My opinions are my own, thank you very much!
From: S.L.Fagg@bnr.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Biggles Books
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:20:27 GMT

francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
> One attraction of Sexton Blake was that
> he had a boy side-kick. Anyone remember his name?

Would the correct answer be "Tinker" by any chance? 

-- 
Regards

Steve Fagg      ( S.L.Fagg@bnr.co.uk +44-279-402437 )
BNR Europe Ltd., London Road, Harlow, Essex, CM17 9NA, UK

*** "Better drowned than duffers. If not duffers, won't drown". ***
From: wismith@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (William R. Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Strippers
Keywords: Alzheimer's disease
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:27:21 GMT
Organization: NAS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA

Barbara Hlavin writes:
	>
	>I'm sure there's a very interesting reason why this discussion of 
	>strippers has turned up in rec.arts.books, and also an explanation 
	>for why the keywords of the discussion are "Alzheimer's disease." 
	>
	>Anyone care to hazard a guess as to what it is?  It has something to 
	>do with deconstruction, doesn't it? 
	>


I thought word got out that Stripper O'Toole had Alzheimer's.  Maybe
its just a rumor.



William Sburgfort Smith
Intel, SSD
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13380 talk.religion.misc:12970 sci.skeptic:13347
From: riggs@descartes.tec.army.mil (Bill Riggs)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:32:00 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
Distribution: na
Organization: LNK Corporation, Riverdale, MD

In article <11455@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (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.

	The original assertion was questionable, but, if we are to
organize reality in such a way that it does not shatter our view
of the world (NOTE TO THE NIETSCHE FANS IN THIS GROUP: I did not resort
to the inevitable German rendition of this phrase, for political
reasons), then we must allow others the same priviledge.

	Since the Bible gives specific figures on ages and dates, and once
upon a time there was a monk who was industrious, and could add and
subtract, the figure of the Creation happening about 4000 B.C. was
derived. We can avoid this conclusion by certain theological formulations
and rational deductions about the accuracy of the source data, but
regretably, this defeats the fundamentalist assertion that every
word in the King James Version is unfailing true.

	If the way in which you define "fundamentalist" is someone who
sticks with the basic message of the Bible, rather than someone who 
quibbles over every line and verse, then your statement makes some sense.
Otherwise, the advantage goes to the opposition.


	Bill R.


	"My opinions do not represent those of my employer or any 
government agency."

-- 
Bill R.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:12930 rec.humor:24389 talk.religion.misc:12590 sci.skeptic:13147
From: cadams@athena.cs.uga.edu (Clark Adams)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 24 Jul 92 02:34:30 GMT
Organization: UGA, Atlanta Freethougth Society

In article <3635@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23.212023.1246@clarinet.com> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
>>I think people put too fine a point on this.   Agnostics proudly stand up
>>and say that there is no way one can know for sure, but the fact is
>>that the vast bulk of them do not believe there is a god, and thus
>>in my book they are athiests, (literally non-theist.)
>
>	Well, perhaps I'm unusual, but I put myself in the agnostic camp. I
>say that at the moment the evidence I see would weigh more towards the 
>conclusion that there is no "God", but any contrary evidence is welcome.
>I see the difference between the two [in their MODERN, rather than their
>older, definitions] as being similar to the difference between your average
>American Catholic/Christian and a Fundamentalist.

(Humorous Atheist-Agnotstic Jode Deleted)

>	In other words, an agnostic is willing to read the evidence as
>it appears; a TRUE atheist just WON'T believe, even if God Himself
>were to come down and talk with him.
>
>
>                                 Sea Wasp
>                                   /^\
                                    ;;;

I think you are falling into stereotypes.  Atheism is a default position:
the lack of belef in G/god/s.  Agnosticism is the position that the 
existence of G/god/s (and other supernatural stuff) is unknowable (usually
improbable).  The two positions are not mutually exclusive. Most atheists
(at least the hundred+ that I know ) would gladly believe in a god if
it were proven that he/she/it/them existed.  To agree with Brad, most 
atheists are agnostics and vice versa if you take the words for their
denotation and not their sterotypical connotation.

THOUGHTfully Yours:
Clark Adams
cadams@athena.cs.uga.edu
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13264 rec.arts.sf.misc:2257 rec.humor:24710 alt.folklore.urban:19945 alt.religion.kibology:3241
From: riawelch@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (K. W. WELCH)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
Subject: Re: who was Sam Walton ( was When did Isaac Asimov die?)
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:45:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Jul27.055402.21928@nezsdc.icl.co.nz>, derek@nezsdc.icl.co.nz (Derek Tearne) writes...
>In article <1992Jul23.210523.23111@sci34hub.sci.com> gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
>>
>>The saddest part about his death, though, is that he died the same weekend
>>as Sam Walton, and $am got allmost all the press coverage. Wonder which one
>>will be better known in 50 years?
>>
> 
>OK who was Sam Walton?  Whoever he was I saw no coverage of his death.

Sam Walton founded Walmart, the chain of discount department stores, and was at
his death one of the wealthiest individuals in America.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin W. Welch  riawelch@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu   

Color television is certainly a lot more fun than this terribly risky
genetic method of reproduction we've taken over.
                                                --Samuel R. Delany
From: maverick@cs.berkeley.edu (Vance Maverick)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Great Western Novel [Re: Great American Novel]
Date: 21 Jul 1992 19:28:43 GMT
Organization: CS Division, UC Berkeley
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: cork.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <MATT.92Jul21122432@physics2.berkeley.edu>, matt@physics2.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern) writes:
|> [recommends Jane Jacobs]
|> 
|> I am told that Jacobs is now studied in Urban Planning courses; I
|> would like to believe that this is true.  

It was true ten years ago -- I hope it's still true, and I keep meaning to
get back to this book.  Thanks for reminding me.

	Vance
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: tmaddox@netcom.com (Tom Maddox)
Subject: Mister Flibbertygib
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 08:16:10 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

	My companion/significant other/partner/spouse equivalent (etc.) wants
to find a Golden Book of yore:  to wit, one _Mister Flibbertygib_, so she says,
which concerns a Very Nervous Mr. Flibb., bothered by noises, whose problems
are resolved when he takes his wife's advice to "eat your roast beef and 
wear your mittens."

	She wants to find an actual copy of the book (which I consider a
Difficult Quest) or at least more-or-less complete bibliographic information.

	E-mail or post as you see fit.


-- 
				Tom Maddox
		    	    tmaddox@netcom.com
		   "I swear I never heard the first shot"
                Wm. Gibson, "Agrippa:  a book of the dead"
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13197 rec.humor:24635 talk.religion.misc:12761 sci.skeptic:13267
From: simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Simon Clippingdale)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:12:39 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England

In article <1992Jul24.164931.142181@cs.cmu.edu> rudis+@cs.cmu.edu (Rujith S DeSilva) writes:
>
> 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?

Pascal; it's known as Pascal's Wager. Try it again on the assumption that
if the 19-D Divine Blue Banana exists and you don't believe in It, then It
will fry you for eternity:

# ``Either the 19DDBB exists or It doesn't. Either I believe in the 19DDBB
# or I don't. Of the four possibilities, only one is to my disadvantage. To
# avoid that possibility, I believe in the 19DDBB.''

and lo and behold, one is compelled to believe in *every* putative deity
which might be pissed off at unbelievers. If every such deity might also
be pissed off at the takers of False(tm) Gods, then one is in deep fudge.

> Rujith de Silva.
> Carnegie-Mellon University.

Cheers

Simon
-- 
Simon Clippingdale                simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk
Department of Computer Science    Tel (+44) 203 523296
University of Warwick             FAX (+44) 203 525714
Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.            or 0203 etc. if you're in the sunny UK
From: lopresti@henson.cc.wwu.edu (lopresti robert)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Robertson Davies
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:04:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: henson.1992Jul29.150459.29804
Organization: Western Washington University


I tend to recommend his FIFTH BUSINESS to people who, like myself,
primarily read mysteries.  After all, all the events in it spring from
a crime (which puts it well within Otto Penzler's definition of a mystery)
and then halfway through (well, a little  further, actually) there is a
mysterious death that may or may not be resolved by the end of this book
(or the third book in the series).

My other favorite is WHAT'S BRED IN THE BONE.  I'm very glad I read it
before THE REBEL ANGELS, because I found TRA almost unreadable and would
certainly not have finisihed the Cornish Trilogy if I'd started it in order.

His ghost stories have a loony charm of their own, by the way.
From: wnoe@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Bill Noe)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: On-Line Library of Congress Catalog?
Date: 30 Jul 92 17:50:51 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

Does anybody know whether the Library of Congress catalog is available on-line
anywhere?  I know of one location (which I reach using 'telnet 192.65.218.43.')
Unfortunately, this site does not allow guests to search for books by keywords,
which is very inconvenient.  Can anybody offer alternate site names?

...B
-- 
wnoe@ecn.purdue.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What a man thinks of himself, that it is which determines, or rather
indicates, his fate."					--Henry David Thoreau
From: ramscar@castle.ed.ac.uk (M Ramscar)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: I don't like Dickens...so sue me!
Date: 22 Jul 92 14:04:24 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University


The wonderfully named Lenore Levine writes

	   The names Dickens uses grate on my nerves. Sort of like fingernails
	   scratching on a blackboard. (On the other hand, I *love* the Gilbert
	   and Sullivan names.)

Why is it that people find Dickens' character names so difficult? Is this
not another case of the rejection of something in fiction - "No, far 
too fantastic" - that one might not even think twice about in "real life".
One has only to think of the regular characters in this little odyssey, 
who's authenticity one accepts (I find I do) despite their often colourful 
appellations.  

For example, had Dickens been an American, I find it hard to believe that 
he wouldn't have created his own Clayton E. Cramer (Craymer perhaps). I 
tend to think that he would have avoided the rather wooden monologues

	I certainly wouldn't assume that all of Edinburgh is as stupid, 
	fanatical, and fascist as the posters from Edinburgh here on this
	newsgroup.

that sometimes make the characterisation of our own Clayton so unconvincing.

Michael 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books