HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Subject: Re: Mandatory negatives (was Re: Agnostics and Athiests)
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 16:35:44 GMT

In article <1992Jul31.142141.28266@cas.org> sdr57@cas.org () writes:
>Finally, I would point out again that the *absence* of conclusive evidence
>for a deity may be taken (if one believes that the deity wishes the choice
>to worship or not to worship to be made freely) as evidence of the
>existence of the deity. 

The 'free will' argument presented here is a good, succinct,
description of the problem argued often by believers and disbelievers.

The issue of demonstration or proof of existence isn't so clear cut,
though.  It depends on the 'description' (powers, character, etc.) of
the deity being proposed.  If the proposed entity merely sets the
universe going (and extended version of " . . . and God said
[Maxwells' Equations]", as it were) and then never intervense, the
difference in the universe from a natural one will almost certainly be
undetectable--at least at this late date.  On the other hand, if the
proposed entity or her agents actively intervene in the continuing
operation of the universe, then one could (in theory, at least)
construct experiments designed to detect the natural consequences of
supernatural intervention.  Many entities have been supposed to exist
that take an active role in the natural universe through supernatural
actions.  It is interesting to note that the characteristics of the
proposed entities tends towards the first type more and more as we
learn more about the natural universe.  I think this may be construed
as a trend, with the limiting point being a toss-up between a purely
natural explanation and an entity of the the first type.

since I made the original posting, I have concluded that one can
actually prove (at least to the vernacular meaning of the term) the
existence or non-existence of an supernatural entity.  What is needed
is an agreement by all relevant parties about what constitutes a clear
and unambiguous test--that is a jointly agreed upon experiment with
the possible outcomes distinguishable and with those results having a
clear menaing with respect to the initial question.  The difficulties
lie in two major areas.  The first being to get a wide-spread enough
agreement about what is a suitable experiment.  The second is that
whichever side 'loses' in the results will probably disavow the
validity of the experiment.  I think it is worth noting in this
context that exactly the same problems occur in investigations of
claims of human paranormal abilities.  What is truly startling
(well . . . not really) is the reluctance of theists the admit that
the same sort of protocols used to work with paranormal claims are
applicable to theistic claims.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare
From: goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re:  Great last sentences
Date: 27 Jul 1992 01:54:26 GMT
Organization: The Sinister Icy Black Hand of Death Club
Reply-To: goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb)
NNTP-Posting-Host: lightning.berkeley.edu
Originator: goldfarb@lightning.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Jul24.155625.2819@newstand.syr.edu> mprisco@lynx.cat.syr.edu writes:
)Here's a paraphrase of a modern mystery writer and now I can't
)remember the writer (Grafton, Julie Smith, Lia Matera????) but
)the last sentance is something like:
)"And I blew him away."
)Margot

	It's one of the Sue Grafton books. Most likely _A is for Alibi_,
but I'm not completely certain.

-- 
   David Goldfarb          |"I'm going to die if you touch me one more time.
goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu  |Well, I guess that I'm going to die no matter what."
goldfarb@UCBOCF.BITNET     |          -- They Might Be Giants
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:12913 rec.arts.sf.misc:2174 rec.humor:24371 alt.folklore.urban:19628 alt.religion.kibology:3177
From: francois@usenet.umr.edu (Why ya askin?)
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 22:15:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: umriscc.5519
Followup-To: rec.arts.books
Organization: University of Missouri -- Rolla

looking for Steven K. Roberts
owner of BEHEMOTH
please respond francois@clciris.chem.umr.edu
or	       francois@ibm530.chem.umr.edu
or	       francois@cs.umr.edu

thanx
.
--
\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></
/<>\BLAK**TO**BASICS*********    \></ We Must Educate Our Own.    /<>\
\></ francois otherwise..        /<>\For Tomorrow Belongs To Those\></
/<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></,>\></Who Prepare For It Today...../<>\
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
Subject: Scientist Fiction (was Re: Asimov and the Decay of SF)
Organization: University of Rochester
	<1992Jul24.194709.1844@sco.com>
Date: 26 Jul 92 17:40:15

In article <1992Jul24.194709.1844@sco.com> joannee@sco.COM (Joanne Eglash) writes:

>I have a friend who claims that my love of literature is "a mere
>hobby" and that "reading any kind of fiction would be a waste of
>my time."  He's a scientist (specializes in an esoteric branch of
>biology that I can't even remember how to spell, let alone 
>understand :-), and he refuses to read ANY novels.  He reads only
>books by scientists (and yes, I've seen him check their credentials
>on the book jacket -- a doctorate from Yale or Harvard is approved
>worthy of his reading time).

>Can anyone recommend fiction (both by authors in previous decades and
>current writers) in which the subject of science and scientists is
>handled intelligently?

Try _Cantor's_Dilemma_ by Carl Djerassi.  This is an entertaining,
scientifically literate, and literally literate novel dealing with the
ethics, politics, and ambiguities of modern scientific research in
general and biochemical/biomedical research in particular.  The
characters are interesting and believable, both as human beings and as
scientists.  And, unlike many works dealing with ethical questions,
this isn't an irritatingly pedantic morality play, but a story about
real people caught in difficult situations...

Djerassi is a chemistry professor at Stanford and a recipient of the
National Medal of Science -- so his credentials should satisfy your
friend.  Besides, any novel that received good reviews from both the
NYT Book Review and Nature must have some ability to satisfy both of
the Cultures. :-)
--
_______________________________________________________________________________

Brian Yamauchi				Robotics Applications Development
					Boeing Aerospace Operations
yamauchi@cs.rochester.edu		Kennedy Space Center
_______________________________________________________________________________

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir)
Subject: MIASMA and, better yet, MIASMATA
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 15:06:48 GMT

What words these are. I'd associate them with Eliot as well as Faulkner.
Stanford's online OED as this to say:

	"Infectious or noxious exhalations from putrescent organic matter"

Boy, those Clarendon Gnomes had their smithy working overtime here.

						Fido
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir)
Subject: Re: _A Constitutional History of the United States_
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 15:25:35 GMT

Mark Taranto writes:

	Clayton Cramer writes:

		Unfortunately, I run into too many college students like 
		the gal who recently expressed amazement at discovering 
		the U.S. had a Civil War in the last century.  (Yes, 
		educated in California).

	This is unfortunate.  I'm as amazed by this as I am by the fact 
	that there are still people who refer to women as "Gals."  It is 
	unfortunate that education does not imply enlightenment.

It is one, maybe the only one, of Cramer's charms that he is quaint. One
example of his quaintness is that he does not feel compelled assiduously 
and slavishly to follow the Correct line in his choice of words and 
expressions. PC is not enlightenment, it is Gadarenism.

							Fido


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
From: stevew@teleride.on.ca (Stephen M. Webb)
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Organization: Teleride Sage Ltd.
Distribution: world,local
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:41:39 GMT

In article <24JUL199211195153@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) writes:
>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?  

It's simply an inaccurate definition of atheism.  An atheist is not one
who believes that a god does not exist.  An atheist is one who does not
believe a god exists.  There is an important semantic difference.  The
above definition of "agnostic" is closer to the best definition of atheist.

To me, an agnostic may still believe in a god, but eschews all organized
religion.  Any good atheist who has arrived at his or her own conclusions
on the existence of a god through the evaluation of evidence would be
open to the possibility of the existence of a godd should sufficient
evidence be presented.  Someone who believes that a god does not exist
on the same epistemological level as True Believers is just another
religious adherent -- more an "untheist" than "atheist."


-- 
------- Stephen M. Webb -------

Ack!  I've accidentally broken my leg!  -- Ed the Happy Clown

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:54:04 GMT

pw15@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Philip  Wang) writes:
>>Most athiests and agnostics are the same.  They think there is no god,
>>they admit it is possible but unlikely and that nobody knows for certain.
>>There's no difference between them.

>My perspective here is that atheist seems to be derogatory and agnostic more
>positive in the sense that I find in my experience atheists out to prove that
>God doesn't exist while agnostics don't think there is a God, but they don't

Let's not forget the Apatheists.  We don't know and we don't really care.
-- 
Even paranoids have enemies. -- Jim Pastore
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: sammy@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (Sammy)
Subject: Re: Unspoken Words
Organization: The Comp Center
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 04:29:48 GMT

In article <712418969@macbeth.cs.duke.edu> kirk@cs.duke.edu (Scooter Corleone) writes:
>As a person who reads a lot, I find I have a large vocabulary of words 
>that I have only read; I've never spoken them or heard them. As a result, I
>know what the words mean, but I don't always know how to pronounce them.
>Since I've been reading a lot of Faulkner lately, I've made considerable
>additions to this vocabulary of unspoken words.
>
[paragraph about miasma deleted]
>
>I was wondering if other readers had noticed this unspoken words phenomenon.
>
>No worries,
>
>Scooter Corleone

Yes, I've been aware of my unspoken vocabulary for a long time, but it
has recently become more noticable to me because I frequently have the
opportunity to talk with someone who actually uses these words.

What I'm finding is that he pronounces them much differently than I do
in my head - or maybe that's the only ones I specifically notice him
using. When carrying on a conversation with him, I also often find
myself using my unspoken vocabulary, and am frequently corrected.

-- 
Sammy=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The enemy of women...is not men, just as the enemy of blacks is not whites.
The enemy is "the tyranny of the dull mind." Carol S. Pearson, _The Hero Within_ 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
From: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Subject: Re: help please, when did Isaac Asimov die?
Reply-To: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Organization: SCI Systems, Inc., Huntsville, Al.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 21:05:23 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.195747.2442@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> amorgan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Crunchy Frog) writes:
|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!

|>: 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. 

|You might not say he was an atheist, but Asimov sure did.

No, he stated he was a scientific agnostic; he had no scientific evidence
of the existance of a god. 

Asimov loved to burst peoples' misconceptions; in one of his books, 
he recounted an exchange with a clueless student. In the course of 
the conversation, the student vociferously decried the modern world, 
and claimed that things were much better run in the "old days", 
referring to pre-Roman empire times, when there was a high level of
culture, etc.

As I recall, the exchange went something like this:

Asimov:   "So, you'd like to live in, say, ancient Greece? Athens?"
Clueless: "Yeah! That would be *great*!"
Asimov:   "You'd enjoy being a slave in the Athenian silver mines?"

Cluless abruptly sat down without a word, and didn't say anything to 
anyone for a while; later, he came by and thanked Asimov for giving 
him a more realistic perspective on things. It hadn't occured to him 
that all that ancient culture was enjoyed by a very few, and the average
person (of which he would have been one) had a very miserable existance.

I'd like to have seen the look on that guys' face....


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?

-- 
Gary Heston    SCI Systems, Inc.  gary@sci34hub.sci.com   site admin
The Chariman of the Board and the CFO speak for SCI. I'm neither.
"Always remember, that someone, somewhere, is making a product that will
make your product obselete." Georges Doriot, founder of American R & D.
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:12946 rec.humor:24410 talk.religion.misc:12599 sci.skeptic:13158
From: jos@and.nl (Jos Horsmeier)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.humor,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 24 Jul 92 07:56:18 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.books
Organization: AND Software BV Rotterdam

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).

I still thank God on my bare knees that I'm an atheist! ;-)

Jos aka jos@and.nl
From: cjh@tinton.ccur.com (Christopher J. Henrich)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Can anyone tell me the source of this text fragment?  Thanks!
Keywords: penguin
Date: 28 Jul 92 00:27:06 GMT
Organization: Concurrent Computer Corp., Tinton Falls, NJ

That passage sounds to me like a scene in _Fire From Heaven_ by
Marty Renault.  This is a book about the childhood and
youth of Alexander the Great, up to his accession to the throne
after the death of his father.
   
In the passage quoted, "the boy" is Alexander, aged about 7 or 8.

Regards,
Chris Henrich
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: loosemore-sandra@CS.YALE.EDU (Sandra Loosemore)
Subject: Re: origin of skid row
Organization: staff hacker @ Yale Haskell project
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 19:31:57 GMT

carlj@muppet.bt.co.uk (Carl Johnson) writes:

   Well the subject pretty much says it all, does anyone
   know the origin of the term?

I've heard that it originates from a Skid Road that existed in Seattle
in the 1800's.  It was used to skid logs down to the waterfront.

-Sandra
From: kamorgan@athena.mit.edu (Keith Morgan)
Subject: Re: Great Western Novel [Re: Great American Novel]
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 17:14:02 GMT

	 maverick@cs.berkeley.edu (Vance Maverick) writes:
>In article <1992Jul20.145549.12498@aero.org>, nadel@aero.org (M.H. Nadel) writes:
>|> 
>|> As for the west, there's Jack London and there's Steinbeck
>|> and not much more.
>
>If you really want
>good writers who did their thing in or about the West, I think I'd strike
>at least London from the list; he's not really what the city of Oakland
>wishes he were.  Might as well revere Gertrude Atherton and Joaquin Miller.

>This could go on forever,
>	Vance


I 'd like to strike a note in defence of Jack London. His reputation
has declined significantly but I have always enjoyed his work. Some of
his published output is "product",i.e. done for quick money; however,
I consider _Call of the Wild_, _White Fang_, and especially _The Sea
Wolf_ to be small masterpieces. _The Iron Heel_ and _People of the
Abyss_ are interesting observations on politics and poverty. As well,
many of the short stories are well worth seeking out and rereading.

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?

BTW: London as a "northern" writer? Also, other "western" writers:
Wallace Stegner, Louis L'Amour, and Zane Grey.

Keith
--
Keith Morgan		      | Just because your voice reaches half-
MIT Libraries                 | way around the world doesn't mean
kamorgan@athena.mit.edu	      | you are wiser than when it reached 
                              | only to the end of the bar. Ed Murrow
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto)
Subject: Re: Robertson Davies
Organization: Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 14:11:47 GMT



Crawford_Kilian@mindlink.bc.ca (Crawford Kilian) writes:

> Davies can do some things very well, but he does them over and over.
> He has one style (at least in the Deptford trilogy), one voice
> regardless of who is narrating the tale.

For the most part, I agree with this assessment, though would add that
it is a great voice.  However, I do see real differences in the two
narrators in THE REBEL ANGELS.  Darcourt is a little more chatty,
while Maria has more passion.  Also, THE MANTICORE -- written in the
form of a journal done during Jungian analyses is quite different.

As for doing the same thing over and over, I think he does vary the theme
enough to make it interesting.  I find that there is always something new
that I learn in each book.  WHAT'S BRED IN THE BONE taught me a lot about
art and Canadian politics.  In THE LYRE OF ORPHEUS (one of his weaker books)
I discovered much about opera.  In WORLD OF WONDERS, I learned about magic.

> Everyone sounds like a damn U of T academic, and it becomes
> increasingly hard, therefore, to take him seriously.

I never knew of this rivalry between Western Canadian academics
and those damn U of T academics.  (and besides, none of Davies' characters
sound like Texans :-)

Mark


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir)
Subject: Re: Mister Flibbertygib
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:52:46 GMT

Beverly Seavey writes:

	Tom Maddox writes...

		My companion...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."

	I think the actual title was "Mr. Flibbertygigit", but I could be 
	wrong.  We had that book. I think it may have been a "Little Golden 
	Book". I have seen some of the '50's versions rereleased in grocery 
	stores recently.  I think a children's librarian would have no 
	trouble ( My mother is one-I can ask her)

The tone and title sound awfully English, in which case the title 
may properly be *Mr Flibbertigibbet*, a common enough word in English 
English. The OED quotes use from the 16th Century (Latimer's 2nd Sermon 
to Edward VI) to present times (by OED definition. Galsworthy's *To Let*). 
The OED's definition is:

	A chattering or gossiping person; a flighty or frivolous woman.

So you can see there has been some gender switching here...All OED
references are to women.

						Fido
From: mworley@mathcs.emory.edu (Meg Worley)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Recommendations wanted for M.F.K.Fisher's books
Date: 27 Jul 92 15:58:00 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Dept of Math and CS


Francis laments the lack of a single peep over Ms. Fisher's
departure on r.a.b.

In rec.food.cooking, however, the keening was loud, long,
and lugubrious.  I believe several people went so far as
to crop their hair and cover themselves in ashes.

How unusual to see too little cross-posting rather than 
too much.

Rage away,

meg
-- 

 Meg Worley 				Internet:  mworley@mathcs.emory.edu		
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir)
Subject: Re: Spoilers - continuing discussion, part 2
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 03:50:46 GMT

Fiona Webster writes:

		I wrote about willed forgetting -- a mental manoeuvre 
		by which you simply forget any "spoilers" you may have 
		heard...

 But is Fiona's "willed forgetting" any more than kissing cousin to the 
age old "suspension of disbelief"? 

						Fido

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: davidf@golem.uucp (David J. Fiander)
Subject: Re: Little Men
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 01:09:18 GMT

According to calvo@nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov (Sherri Calvo):
>
>Anybody else dig out the dusty classics of their childhood lately? How 
>did it go?
>

I didn't read many traditionaly "children's" books until
adulthood.  _Anne of Green Gables_ was the first that I read
recently.  It is a brilliant piece of work.

Nor did I read any of the Oz sequels until I'd grown up.  They
don't quite qualify as brilliant, but they are an enjoyable way
to spend an hour or two (each).

- David
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: beede@sctc.com (Mike Beede)
Subject: Re: Great last sentences
Organization: SCTC
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 21:08:02 GMT

>	It was a list of words, it was not a list of words, it was
>	a run-on sentence, it was not a sentence, it was the beginning
>	of a book, it was not the beginning of a book, it put me sleep --
>	in short, put me into an irreversable coma....
>
>	To bad Dickens never met Mr. Strunk.

Gee, I have a comment on this that is (almost) to good too pass up.

	Mike





-- 
Mike Beede         Secure Computing
beede@sctc.com     1210 W. County Rd E, Suite 100           
------------------ Arden Hills, MN  55112
                       (612) 482-7420
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books