help please, when did Isaac Asimov die?

8 views
Skip to first unread message

Rae Stabosz

unread,
Jul 18, 1992, 10:36:34 AM7/18/92
to
Hi,

My daughter would like to prove to someone that Isaac Asimov has died.
This person, a real fan of Asimov's, refuses to believe it. She's
also got $20 riding on this. Can someone give me either his actual
date of death, or at least the month? She's going to start looking
through newspaper archives, but all we can remember is that it was
maybe sometime in winter.

Rae

Jim Kasprzak

unread,
Jul 19, 1992, 5:59:51 PM7/19/92
to
Isaac Asimov is not dead. I saw him eating hot dogs with Elvis Presley and
Kibo at a diner in Schenectady, NY.

Terry Chan

unread,
Jul 19, 1992, 8:28:53 PM7/19/92
to
In article <3pp...@rpi.edu> kas...@rpi.edu writes:

+ Isaac Asimov is not dead. I saw him eating hot dogs with Elvis Presley and
+Kibo at a diner in Schenectady, NY.

Plus, he's still writing the ASK MARILYN column in _Parade_ magazine.
I just saw today's.


Terry "Or was that Harlan Ellison?" Chan
--
Internet: TWC...@lbl.gov I disclaim all disclaimers.

David Kassover

unread,
Jul 19, 1992, 9:25:53 PM7/19/92
to
In article <3pp...@rpi.edu> kas...@rpi.edu writes:
>
> Isaac Asimov is not dead. I saw him eating hot dogs with Elvis Presley and
>Kibo at a diner in Schenectady, NY.

I dunno exactly what Jim saw, but Schenectady is a singularly
appropriate place for a sighting of this kind.

Some years ago, in a fit of pique, a science fiction writer
answered the question "Where *do* you get your ideas" with "Well,
I'm not supposed to let this out, but there's a P.O. box in
Schenectady, NY. We writers send $2.00 and an SASE, and back
comes an idea". Somewhat later, several short stories of this
writer were collected, and published in a volume entitled _It
Came From Schenectady". The cover art was a futuristic rendering
of the view of GE's main plant. When I had an office in building
37, I made a point to keep a copy on my desk, waiting for people
to recognize the meatball.


Now, then, if the sighting had been in Rensselaerville, I might
have been a little less skeptical...

--
David Kassover "Proper technique helps protect you against
uupsi!khazad!kassover sharp weapons and dull judges."
kass...@aule-tek.com F. Collins
kass...@ra.crd.ge.com

Jim Kasprzak

unread,
Jul 19, 1992, 11:55:16 PM7/19/92
to
In article <1992Jul20.0...@crd.ge.com>, kass...@rumsey.crd.ge.com (David Kassover) writes:
|> In article <3pp...@rpi.edu> kas...@rpi.edu writes:
|> > Isaac Asimov is not dead. I saw him eating hot dogs with Elvis Presley and
|> >Kibo at a diner in Schenectady, NY.
|>
|> I dunno exactly what Jim saw, but Schenectady is a singularly
|> appropriate place for a sighting of this kind.
|>
|> Some years ago, in a fit of pique, a science fiction writer
|> answered the question "Where *do* you get your ideas" with "Well,
|> I'm not supposed to let this out, but there's a P.O. box in
|> Schenectady, NY. We writers send $2.00 and an SASE, and back
|> comes an idea". Somewhat later, several short stories of this
|> writer were collected, and published in a volume entitled _It
|> Came From Schenectady". The cover art was a futuristic rendering
|> of the view of GE's main plant.
|>
|> Now, then, if the sighting had been in Rensselaerville, I might
|> have been a little less skeptical...

Well, maybe they were there too, but _I_ wouldn't have seen them. The
diners in Rensselaerville are all lousy. Absolute grease-pits.

James 'Kibo' Parry

unread,
Jul 20, 1992, 12:46:45 AM7/20/92
to
In article <3pp...@rpi.edu> kas...@rpi.edu writes:

HEY! The Wonder Burger is NOT a diner!

I think I caught my flu from Elvis. Also, there was this near-disaster
when our sideburns all collided.
-- K.

Duncan Peter G. Thornton

unread,
Jul 20, 1992, 3:46:56 AM7/20/92
to
In <3pp...@rpi.edu> kas...@jacob.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak) writes:

> Isaac Asimov is not dead. I saw him eating hot dogs with Elvis Presley and
>Kibo at a diner in Schenectady, NY.

Jesus, have some respect. It's not "dead," it's metabolically
challenged. Get with the program.

- Duncan


__________________________________________________________________
Prolongs | | Restores
* | E*L*E*C*T*R*I*C*I*T*Y I*S L*I*F*E! | *
Life! | | Health!
__________________________________________________________________
Duncan Thornton tho...@ccu.umanitoba.ca

Rae Stabosz

unread,
Jul 20, 1992, 9:14:08 AM7/20/92
to
*******


Got it. April 6, 1992. Thanks to all who responded! My daughter won
her choice of $20 in cash or $20 in free videogames from the owner of
the new arcade in town. She chose the cash. Good move.


Rae

Richard John Rauser

unread,
Jul 20, 1992, 8:35:16 PM7/20/92
to
sta...@chopin.udel.edu (Rae Stabosz) writes:

Are you kidding? What about Street Fighter II? Sorry, wrong newsgroup...

--
Richard J. Rauser "Remember, no matter where you go,
rau...@sfu.ca there you are."
WNI -Buckaroo Banzai

chi...@binah.cc.brandeis.edu

unread,
Jul 21, 1992, 10:10:02 AM7/21/92
to
In article <1992Jul20.0...@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, tho...@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Duncan Peter G. Thornton) writes:
>In <3pp...@rpi.edu> kas...@jacob.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak) writes:
>
>> Isaac Asimov is not dead. I saw him eating hot dogs with Elvis Presley and
>>Kibo at a diner in Schenectady, NY.
>
>Jesus, have some respect. It's not "dead," it's metabolically
>challenged. Get with the program.
>
>- Duncan
>
At Disney Land you can get passes that are good any day of your life.
Does that mean Elvis would have a problem using one?

-Jen

Rich Greenberg

unread,
Jul 20, 1992, 11:55:57 PM7/20/92
to
>In article <BrL9w...@news.udel.edu>, sta...@chopin.udel.edu (Rae Stabosz) writes:
> Hi,

> My daughter would like to prove to someone that Isaac Asimov has died.
> This person, a real fan of Asimov's, refuses to believe it. She's
> also got $20 riding on this. Can someone give me either his actual
> date of death, or at least the month? She's going to start looking
> through newspaper archives, but all we can remember is that it was
> maybe sometime in winter.

Acording to the editorial in the 9/92 issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine,
he died April 6, 1992 :-(((

He was 72 years old and had been ill for about a year.

RIP Isaac.

--

Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - ri...@hatch.socal.com

Larry Gilmore

unread,
Jul 21, 1992, 8:10:41 PM7/21/92
to
>>>
>>>RIP Isaac.
>>^^^^ ^^^^^
>>
>>NOT Isaac! He's up there raising H*** with someone!
>>
>
>Ah, a-hem, that would be *down* there.

NOT! Isaac is UP there, that's why he's RAISING it!

--
Larry A. Gilmore Internet: gil...@venice.sedd.trw.com
TRW SEDD, DH1/2849
P.O. Box 6213 Phone: (310)764-3318
Carson, CA 90746 Fax: (310)764-3946

lawrence finkel cis stnt

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 7:51:03 AM7/22/92
to
In article <1992Jul21....@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> b...@ultisol.gsfc.nasa.gov (MAC) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21....@venice.sedd.trw.com> gil...@venice.sedd.trw.com (Larry Gilmore) writes:

>>In article <Brq09...@hatch.socal.com> ri...@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) writes:
>>>>In article <BrL9w...@news.udel.edu>, sta...@chopin.udel.edu (Rae Stabosz) writes:
>>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> My daughter would like to prove to someone that Isaac Asimov has died.
>>>
>>>Acording to the editorial in the 9/92 issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine,
>>>he died April 6, 1992 :-(((
>>>
>>>He was 72 years old and had been ill for about a year.
>>>
>>>RIP Isaac.
>>^^^^ ^^^^^
>>
>>NOT Isaac! He's up there raising H*** with someone!
>>
>
>Ah, a-hem, that would be *down* there.


Sorry folks ,
Asimov was freeze dried 2 hours before his official _Death_.
Attempts will be made to reconstitute him in 2437.
--
#-----------------------------------------------------------------------------#
# Lawrence Finkel: lxf...@hertz.njit.edu #
# "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced." #
#-----------------------------------------------------------------------------#

Jim Heath

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 9:25:13 AM7/22/92
to
From article <1992Jul21....@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>, by b...@ultisol.gsfc.nasa.gov (MAC):

> In article <1992Jul21....@venice.sedd.trw.com> gil...@venice.sedd.trw.com (Larry Gilmore) writes:
>>In article <Brq09...@hatch.socal.com> ri...@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) writes:
>>>>In article <BrL9w...@news.udel.edu>, sta...@chopin.udel.edu (Rae Stabosz) writes:
>>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> My daughter would like to prove to someone that Isaac Asimov has died.
>>>
>>>Acording to the editorial in the 9/92 issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine,
>>>he died April 6, 1992 :-(((
>>>
>>>He was 72 years old and had been ill for about a year.
>>>
>>>RIP Isaac.
>>^^^^ ^^^^^
>>
>>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?
--
"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)

bill nelson

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 3:13:03 PM7/22/92
to
jhe...@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

Crunchy Frog

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 3:57:47 PM7/22/92
to
In article <1992Jul22.1...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>
bi...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>jhe...@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.

>Bill

C Frog

Don Fearn

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 4:23:12 PM7/22/92
to
In article <1992Jul22.1...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, bi...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:

|> I would not say that he was an atheist.

Perhaps *you* wouldn't, but *he* did in his long two-volume autobiography.

--

Pooder - Rochester, MN - DoD# 0591 (I think) - LotN
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quid tibi (est) opiniones aliorum: What do you care what other people think?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I share garage space with: Gretchen - '86 K75 Harvey - '72 CB500
------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. E. Shum

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 4:18:14 PM7/22/92
to

In article <1992Jul22.1...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, bi...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:

However, in his auto-biography, he did refer to himself as a "jewish
atheist."

--
<j...@mitre.org>|--------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------| Libertarian Party
Andre Marrou Nancy Lord for | 1528 Pennsylvania Avenue SE (202)543-1988
for President Vice-President | Washington, DC 20003 (800)682-1776

Robert Church

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 6:49:18 PM7/22/92
to
In article <Brt90...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> hu...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke) writes:

>In article <1992Jul22.1...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU> jhe...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:
>>
>>But do atheists _go_ anywhere when they die?
>
>Asimov himself wrote that he'd prefer nothingness, as he doesn't consider the
>standard image of 'heaven' to be appropriate for any rational man...

The problem with Asimov was the he felt (feels, is he dead?) that reality would
actually shape itself into what he thought it should be. If you disagree read
the intro to "Before the Golden Years".


--
*********************************************
* bob church *
* bch...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu *
* D-8195 NFS #27 *

Terry Chan

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 7:29:53 PM7/22/92
to
In article <1992Jul22.2...@rchland.ibm.com> Poo...@vnet.ibm.com,
but I can't receive e-mail, so forget it. [cool name, BTW] writes:

+In article <1992Jul22.1...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>,
bi...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
+
+|> I would not say that he was an atheist.
+
+Perhaps *you* wouldn't, but *he* did in his long two-volume autobiography.

Ah, what does HE know.


Terry "mono[syllabic]theist" Chan

bill nelson

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 7:23:10 PM7/22/92
to
j...@cyclone.MITRE.org (J. E. Shum) writes:
:
: > 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."

Hm. I must have missed it when I read the autobiography. Guess I will
have to re-read it. I will report back in a couple of years, after I
get my library bookcases built, so I can find the books.

Bill

Wilson Heydt

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 7:27:07 PM7/22/92
to

"Andy", no doubt . . .

I think Asimov made it pretty plain that he considered the existence
to the supernatural--of any sort--to be exceedingly unlikely. It's a
fair claim to describe him as having been an atheist.

As to where an atheist goes . . . 6 feet under, one presumes.

--Hal
--
Hal Heydt | "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell | --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447 | "... kill all the lawyers."
whh...@pbhya.PacBell.COM | --William Shakespeare

Phillip M. Hallam-Baker

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 6:26:29 PM7/22/92
to
In article <1992Jul20.0...@ccu.umanitoba.ca>,
tho...@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Duncan Peter G. Thornton) writes:
>
|>In <3pp...@rpi.edu> kas...@jacob.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak) writes:
|>
|>> Isaac Asimov is not dead. I saw him eating hot dogs with Elvis
|>Presley and
|>>Kibo at a diner in Schenectady, NY.
|>
|>Jesus, have some respect. It's not "dead," it's metabolically
|>challenged. Get with the program.

The Azimov death myth has been about since the seventies. Azimov himself
debunked it in his book of collected short stories:

"Many of my readers assume that I am dead and are quite surprised to
find me still alive. Nevertheless this is indeed the case."


Need I say more?

Phill

Phillip M. Hallam-Baker

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 6:29:00 PM7/22/92
to
In article <1992Jul22.1...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU>,
jhe...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:

|>But do atheists _go_ anywhere when they die?

Depends if they are taking part in a snuff movie called `Dinner at
Dahmers or not'.

Phill

Charles Lasner

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 7:51:25 PM7/22/92
to
In article <1992Jul22....@linus.mitre.org> j...@cyclone.MITRE.org (J. E. Shum) writes:
>>
>> I would not say that he was an atheist. More correctly, he just did not
>> accept any "Devine text" as literal truth.
>>
>> Bill

Is that Andy Devine? (or is it Smilin' Ed?)

cjl

bill nelson

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 8:20:21 PM7/22/92
to
whh...@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
: In article <1992Jul22.1...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> bi...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: >
: >I would not say that he was an atheist. More correctly, he just did not

: >accept any "Devine text" as literal truth.
:
: "Andy", no doubt . . .
:
: I think Asimov made it pretty plain that he considered the existence
: to the supernatural--of any sort--to be exceedingly unlikely. It's a
: fair claim to describe him as having been an atheist.

Yes and no. An atheist would deny that there could be a supernatural. An
agnostic would say that he did not currently believe in the supernatural
but is open to proof otherwise.

I would expect that Asimov, being the scientist he was, would always be
willing to accept proof to the contrary.

Bill

JH Hofmeyr

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 11:05:42 PM7/22/92
to
In article <Brq09...@hatch.socal.com> ri...@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) writes:
>From: ri...@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg)
>Subject: Re: help please, when did Isaac Asimov die?
>Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 03:55:57 GMT

>RIP Isaac.

Ah! At last someone who answers a question!

Thanks Rich.
** ~~~~~/ / /* JH Hofmeyr * "If I want a kettle, I buy **
** / / / / * 914...@sunvax.sun.ac.za * one, I don't buy a 486 **
** / /~~~/~~~/ * Univ of Stellenbosch * to do the job! **
**\__/ / / / * South Africa * -- Meself **

Urban F

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 1:53:02 AM7/22/92
to
gil...@venice.sedd.trw.com (Larry Gilmore) writes:

>>>>RIP Isaac.
>>>^^^^ ^^^^^
>>>NOT Isaac! He's up there raising H*** with someone!
>>
>>Ah, a-hem, that would be *down* there.

>NOT! Isaac is UP there, that's why he's RAISING it!

As an atheist, he is naturally in neither place.
--
Urban Fredriksson ( N.G.U.Fredri...@oasis.icl.co.uk )
/ <- this is an ASCII map of Sweden

Clark Adams

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 9:38:15 PM7/22/92
to

He has said he was an atheist humanist. Until he died he was President
of the American Humanist Association. Also, at a speech he gave in New Jersey
a few years ago, which a couple of my friends were able to attend, he
said that there came a point early in his life when he matter-of-
factly-accepted atheism as he previously had religion.

Conatact the American Humanist Association in Amherst, NY or The Freefom
From Religion Foundation (P.O. Box 750, Madison, WI 53701) to verify
this.

Barbara Haddad

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 7:05:04 PM7/22/92
to
b...@ultisol.gsfc.nasa.gov (MAC) writes:

> In article <1992Jul21....@venice.sedd.trw.com> gil...@venice.sedd.tr


> >In article <Brq09...@hatch.socal.com> ri...@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenber

> >>>In article <BrL9w...@news.udel.edu>, sta...@chopin.udel.edu (Rae Stabos

> >>> Hi,
> >>
> >>> My daughter would like to prove to someone that Isaac Asimov has died.
> >>

> >>Acording to the editorial in the 9/92 issue of Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine,
> >>he died April 6, 1992 :-(((
> >>
> >>He was 72 years old and had been ill for about a year.
> >>
> >>RIP Isaac.

> >^^^^ ^^^^^


> >
> >NOT Isaac! He's up there raising H*** with someone!
> >
>
> Ah, a-hem, that would be *down* there.
>

.........ah, come on, we all know he didn't believe in an afterlife.
Right now Asimov is waiting to be recycled. If anyone has a kid 6 or so
months from now that starts crawling off to type madly on their
typewriter, we'll know he's back in the saddle again. ;)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Haddad -> (bha...@clubzen.fidonet.org)

S. Mudgett aka little gator

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 3:21:30 AM7/23/92
to

> I would not say that he was an atheist.

you wouldn't, but he did.


little "isaac asimov made a pass at my husband once" gator
--
-- little gator aka S. Mudgett email: s...@harvee.uucp
-- friend of a gator is a friend of mine

jim hori

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 10:30:06 AM7/23/92
to

I assume this is a reference to Andy Devine.


....
ji...@west.sun.com

Matt Hucke

unread,
Jul 22, 1992, 5:57:23 PM7/22/92
to
>But do atheists _go_ anywhere when they die?

Asimov himself wrote that he'd prefer nothingness, as he doesn't consider the


standard image of 'heaven' to be appropriate for any rational man...

--
"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
hu...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu _ V_ a_ l_ h_ a_ l_ l_ a BBS, 217-352-3682, WWIV4.21, 14.4k

Larry M Headlund

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 11:58:26 AM7/23/92
to
In article <1992Jul22.2...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu> bch...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Robert Church) writes:
>In article <Brt90...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> hu...@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Matt Hucke) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul22.1...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU> jhe...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:
>>>
>>>But do atheists _go_ anywhere when they die?
>>
>>Asimov himself wrote that he'd prefer nothingness, as he doesn't consider the
>>standard image of 'heaven' to be appropriate for any rational man...
>
>The problem with Asimov was the he felt (feels, is he dead?) that reality would
>actually shape itself into what he thought it should be. If you disagree read
>the intro to "Before the Golden Years".
>
Gee, I didn't know Asimov was an engineer.

ObUL request:
This is vaguely related to Asimov since he was a skeptic.

I was recently reading _The Faith Healers_ by Randi and realized I
haven't heard any faith healer UL's. There is no lack of religious UL's
(The Vanishing Hitchhiker) nor sickness UL's (Craig) but no faith healing
UL's.
So, has anyone one had a FOAF healed by a faith healer? Or has
anyone had a FOAF die after throwing away their insulin after visting
a faith healer.
This would seem a natural field for UL's but maybe I travel in
the wrong circles?
Famous people you have met that have been healed by faith
healers qualifies for extra points.

Larry "The Oral Roberts of the computer field: I put my hand on the
terminal and CAST OUT THESE GERBILS" Headlund

--
Larry Headlund l...@world.std.com Eikonal Systems (617) 482-3345

LUCIFER

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 2:01:47 PM7/23/92
to
jhe...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes

>But do atheists _go_ anywhere when they die?

yup.Low income housing, somewhere in a back corner of limbo.

James D. Jones

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 3:17:32 PM7/23/92
to

Nope. They go to Heck, which is sort of like an eternal college faculty
party in a large, rambling flat. It's always 11:30 p.m. on Friday night,
the bathtub's full of imported beer, and they've got good Mondavi jug wine in
the kitchen. If you're not lucky, though, you might end up arguing
phenomenology with a bearded guy in a tweed jacket (pipe smoker, of course)
until the end of time.

LUCIFER

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 3:48:46 PM7/23/92
to
bi...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes

>An agnostic would say that he did not currently believe in the supernatural
>but is open to proof otherwise.

I consider myself an agnostic, yet I am a practicing Jew, becouse I think
that that religion has a lot going for it. But I am not certain that it's
(Judeaism) is correct.
I think most agnostics practice athiesm, simply becouse it is easier. or that
they are closet athiests, but are afraid to admit it)

HELD HOSTAGE -- YEAR ONE

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 4:04:44 PM7/23/92
to
In article <1992Jul22....@dscomsf.desy.de> hal...@zeus02.desy.de writes:
>
>The Azimov death myth has been about since the seventies. Azimov himself
>debunked it in his book of collected short stories:
>
>"Many of my readers assume that I am dead and are quite surprised to
>find me still alive. Nevertheless this is indeed the case."
>
>
>Need I say more?
>
>Phill

Looks like it finally caught up with him. 6 April 1992 was not a good day.
One book of Asimov's collected short stories? That would be on hell of a
big book.

M.
--
------------------------ man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu ------------------------
Nobody likes you.
Everybody hates you.
You're gonna lose.

Jim Heath

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 3:32:34 PM7/23/92
to
From article <1992Jul22....@linus.mitre.org>, by j...@cyclone.MITRE.org (J. E. Shum):

>
> In article <1992Jul22.1...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, bi...@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>> jhe...@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

Brad Templeton

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 5:20:23 PM7/23/92
to
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.)

The number of athiests who state that they know there is a god and that
it is impossible that there be any sort of god is small. The Objectivists
are about the only ones I have met of that stripe.

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.
--
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366

Gary Heston

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 5:05:23 PM7/23/92
to

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. ga...@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.

Tom Streeter

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 5:46:00 PM7/23/92
to
In article <l6u1ec...@male.EBay.Sun.COM> ji...@cleanplate.EBay.Sun.COM (James D. Jones) writes:
>Nope. They go to Heck, which is sort of like an eternal college faculty
>party in a large, rambling flat. It's always 11:30 p.m. on Friday night,
>the bathtub's full of imported beer, and they've got good Mondavi jug wine in
>the kitchen. If you're not lucky, though, you might end up arguing
>phenomenology with a bearded guy in a tweed jacket (pipe smoker, of course)
>until the end of time.

Now *this* is scary...............

--Tom "going to go sign up for a religion, quick!" Streeter

--
Tom Streeter | stre...@cs.unca.edu
Dept. of Mass Communication | 704-251-6227
University of North Carolina at Asheville | Opinions expressed here are
Asheville, NC 28804 | mine alone.

Chris Brewster

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 6:19:38 PM7/23/92
to
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.)

...


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.

This is confused. You're muddling the difference between "I don't believe
in God" and "I believe there is no God". One position states the question
is indeterminate, the other states a position on one side. Remember,
"don't believe" doesn't mean "disbelieve".


Agnostic position:

"...there is no way one can know for sure..."

"...do not believe there is a god..."

"...it is possible but unlikely and that nobody knows for certain."
^^^^^^^^^^^^
This "leaning" isn't particularly in either camp,
atheistic or agnostic.

Atheistic position:

"They think there is no god..."


Agnostics, logically, are no closer to atheists than they are to believers.
Your point seems to be that agnostics lean toward atheism, but this is only
from the standpoint of believers. I'm an agnostic and I don't lean toward
either atheism or belief in a god.

Chris Brewster

Larry M Headlund

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 5:12:07 PM7/23/92
to
In article <Brup...@ecf.toronto.edu> ric...@ecf.toronto.edu (George Matthew Rice) writes:

>In article <Brun1...@world.std.com> l...@world.std.com (Larry M Headlund) writes:
>>>
>> Gee, I didn't know Asimov was an engineer.
>
>I thought that he had a Ph.D. in biochemistry and he was tenured at
>Boston U (or somewhere around there).
>
What I was responding to was a statement to the effect that Asimov
believed that his thoughts could change the world to reflect what he imagined.
Are we going to have to resort to smileys?

Why ya askin?

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 6:15:45 PM7/23/92
to
looking for Steven K. Roberts
owner of BEHEMOTH
please respond fran...@clciris.chem.umr.edu
or fran...@ibm530.chem.umr.edu
or fran...@cs.umr.edu

thanx
.
--
\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></
/<>\BLAK**TO**BASICS********* \></ We Must Educate Our Own. /<>\
\></ francois otherwise.. /<>\For Tomorrow Belongs To Those\></
/<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></<>\></,>\></Who Prepare For It Today...../<>\

Philip Wang

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 6:00:35 PM7/23/92
to

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
discount the possibility of God's existence and therefore don't try to prove
anything (or don't try as hard). I'm agnostic, but I don't try to prove that
there is no such thing as dieties or supernatural beings (I do believe in
ghosts). My point being that the way I see it, atheists are definite that God
doesn't exist and agnostics just aren't sure and choose not to believe in God
as sort of a default. At least that's what I do.

Sorry, can't think of any jokes. Maybe next time.

philip

"Inside the power cage, I can feel the music call my rage
It's paranoid, first degree. It's telling me that I'm not free.
I've got heavy metal music in my blood and I like to get it to you if I could"
-Holocaust, "Heavy Metal Mania" ||||||||| pw...@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu |||||||||

John McCarthy

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 12:40:12 PM7/23/92
to
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.

Ron Dippold

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 7:54:04 PM7/23/92
to
pw...@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

Sea Wasp

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 8:33:31 PM7/23/92
to
In article <1992Jul23....@clarinet.com> br...@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.

There's a story I like which points up the difference:

An atheist and an agnostic are sitting on the shore of the Red Sea
when Moses comes booking out of Egypt, bringing the Hebrews with him
and pursued by all of Pharoah's men.
Both the spectators ask what's going on; when told, they look at the
mob of soldiers approaching and recommend either fast surrender or quick
swimming lessons.
Moses just smiles and raises his arms.
With a roar of a thousand cataracts, the Sea parts, while a great
pillar of fire holds the shocked Egyptians at bay. The Hebrews follow Moses'
gesture and run.
The agnostic, eyes wide, looks at the water, looks at Moses, looks
back to the water.
Then he drops to his knees, looking skyward, and says, "HALLELUJA,
I am SAVED! Brother, I BELIEVE!"

The atheist, eyes wide, looks at the water, looks at Moses, looks
back to the water.
Then he nods and smiles appreciatively. "Great trick. Mirrors,
right?"


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
/^\
;;;

Clark Adams

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 10:34:30 PM7/23/92
to
In article <36...@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> sea...@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>In article <1992Jul23....@clarinet.com> br...@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
cad...@athena.cs.uga.edu

Clayton Cramer

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 4:04:02 PM7/23/92
to
In article <1992Jul22....@dscomsf.desy.de>, hal...@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) writes:
> In article <1992Jul22.1...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU>,

> jhe...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath) writes:
>
> |>But do atheists _go_ anywhere when they die?
>
> Depends if they are taking part in a snuff movie called `Dinner at
> Dahmers or not'.
>
> Phill

"Dinner at Dahmer's" -- doubtless, the next movie released by Time-
Warner. I'm sure it will be very successful.

--
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.

DNA Kaifeng

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 12:14:33 AM7/24/92
to
cad...@athena.cs.uga.edu (Clark Adams) writes:

>(Humorous Atheist-Agnotstic Jode Deleted)

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).

-steve

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@******************************************
@ email: sr...@beagle.colorado.edu @* "Nothing in biology makes sense except *
@ Dept. of Molecular, Cellular @* in the light of evolution." *
@ and Developmental Biology @* - T. Dobzhansky *
@ University of Colorado, Boulder @* Opinions are my own. *
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@******************************************

Speaker-to-Minerals

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 2:20:39 AM7/24/92
to
In article <1992Jul23....@clarinet.com> br...@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.)

There's a big difference between not believing there is a god and believing
that there is no god.

Brad Templeton

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 3:35:50 AM7/24/92
to
In article <CB.92Jul...@tamarack13.timbuk> c...@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster) writes:
>This is confused. You're muddling the difference between "I don't believe
>in God" and "I believe there is no God". One position states the question
>is indeterminate, the other states a position on one side. Remember,
>"don't believe" doesn't mean "disbelieve".

Well, I've read your explanation, and I still think this is a moot point.
In my worldview, these are the same statement. Whatever difference
you perceive between them has no meaning in the real world. No matter
which of these views you take, your life and relationship to god are
the same, ie. you have no relationship to god. You don't worship, go
to church or change your behaviour in any way that is based on the
existence of a god.


Agnostics are not theists. As far as I am concerned that makes them
athiests in thought and deed.

In all their behavior they are MUCH closer to athiests, even the
Objectivist kind, then they are to believers.

I would call myself an athiest. I have no belief in god and have
good confidence in that belief. I'm open to new evidence at all times,
but I've spent a lot of time examining the evidence (and my dad has
a Doctor of Divinity, was a very famous preacher and is now an agnostic,
so I've had this evidence from early on in life) and what I've seen
lead me to declare with confidence that I see no reason for belief in god.

But you see, to me "I see no reason for belief in" leads inexorably to
"I do not believe in." To me they are the same, and that is why an
agnostic and athiest are no different. An agnostic also sees no reason
for belief in god. She's much farther from the faithful than from me.

Torkel Franzen

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 3:23:35 AM7/24/92
to
In article <1992Jul24....@cco.caltech.edu> lyd...@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.
EDU (Speaker-to-Minerals) writes:

>There's a big difference between not believing there is a god and believing
>that there is no god.

At last alt.atheism stretches its tentacles into the dens of bookishness.
You are about to learn that life isn't all beer and skittles and the
civilized exchange of labored witticisms. The Definition of Atheism is about
to grab you by your scrawny throats and shake you until you are dead.

Jos Horsmeier

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 3:56:18 AM7/24/92
to
In article <srutt.711951273@beagle> sr...@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 j...@and.nl

Rosalie J Casey

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 3:57:17 AM7/24/92
to
>>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

If you had a bet to take, either for a god and go to
'eternal bliss', or that there is no god and take your chances...

where would your money be?
------
no sig , to cheep
rca...@iris.calpoly.edu

Ralph Marrone

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 8:02:50 AM7/24/92
to

Agnosticism is the Schrodinger's Cat of theism. Believers/Atheists
already know that the cat is alive/dead (or dead/alive if you prefer);
they've perceived enough evidence to support their positions. For
agnostics, the Cat is in a live/dead state; i.e., the evidence does not
support either position. I think this is called healthy skepticism.

Oh, by the way, I'm agnostic.


Regards,

rafem

Gerry cafolla

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 7:35:09 AM7/24/92
to

I personally think that Agnostics just can't make up their minds !.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
- Gerry Cafolla - No job is ever too -
- - small !! -
----------------------------------------------------------------

allen.j.tino

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 9:14:41 AM7/24/92
to
From article <srutt.711951273@beagle>, by sr...@boulder.Colorado.EDU (DNA Kaifeng):

> 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).
>
> -steve

People who are truly skeptical of something usually don't believe
it (until and unless evidence to the contrary is presented).
That's what an atheist is with respect to the existence (or even
the concept) of god.

Do you really think that scientists have no beliefs? Does having
a belief require absolute certainty and a refusal to change your
mind in the light of new knowledge?
_______
Al Tino
ti...@globe2.ATT.COM

A. Jing Hippy

unread,
Jul 23, 1992, 10:33:41 AM7/23/92
to
In article <1992Jul22.1...@CERIS.Purdue.EDU>, jhe...@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?


Yeah, Cleveland. Although George Carlin says that he thinks you end up in
a coin-return slot in Philadelphia.

+--------------------------------------------------+
|Dave Cochran, Data General Corporation, RTP, NC |
|coc...@dg-rtp.dg.com |
+--------------------------------------------------+
|If I owned Texas and Hell, I would rent out Texas |
|and live in Hell. - Philip Henry Sheridan |
+--------------------------------------------------+

Simon Clippingdale

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 11:13:32 AM7/24/92
to
In article <srutt.711951273@beagle> sr...@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).

Well, it's a matter of degree. I have no evidence either way that the universe
was or wasn't created by a 19-dimensional divine blue banana (although those
damn bananaians will insist that of course the evidence is all around us, the
very fabric of the universe itself).

Do I reserve judgement and pronounce myself an agnostic (I don't believe that
a 19-D DBB created the universe), or do I stick my neck out and pronouce myself
an abananaist (I believe that a 19-D DBB didn't create the universe)?

How small does the estimated probability of a theory being true have to get
before one comes right out and believes it's wrong? If some evidence turns
up, nothing prevents me from revising my belief accordingly, so I don't
accept your last statement. One can always change one's mind; one is not
required to reserve judgement in order to be scientific, merely to modify
it as appropriate.

> -steve

Cheers

Simon
--
Simon Clippingdale si...@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

Gary Heston

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 10:46:58 AM7/24/92
to
>>>In article <BrL9w...@news.udel.edu>, sta...@chopin.udel.edu (Rae Stabosz) writes:

>>> My daughter would like to prove to someone that Isaac Asimov has died.
>>> This person, a real fan of Asimov's, refuses to believe it.

This person is lying to your daughter. If he were a real fan of Asimovs',
he'd have a subscriber to _Isaac Asimovs' Science Fiction Magazine_, and
would have read the announcement in the issue before last, as well as the
editorial in the last issue.

This person, therefore, is not a Real Fan [TM].

Your daughter wins by default!

David LeCompte

unread,
Jul 24, 1992, 12:16:32 PM7/24/92