• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

James Randi dead at 92.

Crossbow said:
James Randi was a fine man and I will miss him.
Click to expand...


Me too.

By the way, has anyone noticed that Paul Bethke never did succeed in using his god powers to blind James Randi (and quite a few other people here on the Forum).
Click to expand...


I would like to know if Randi's best friend has used his remains to blind Uri Geller.
Randi's wish for a final resting place deserves to be fulfilled:
Canadian magician, skeptic The Amazing Randi dead at 92 (CBC News, Oct. 22, 2020)
 
Ron Obvious said:
Thanks! I sincerely began to worry if many people were taking me literally, especially as I have virtually no track record here.

Yes, I meant it sarcastically. Sorry, Scorpion.
Click to expand...


I am sure 99% of us here recognised it as sarcasm Ron.

Scorpion is guided by spiritual experiences overriding the comprehension most of us here are limited by.

In answer to some other comments, I think Randi would not have been pleased that some had described his death as "passing", or even seeing RIP expressed by some.
 
Thor 2 said:
In answer to some other comments, I think Randi would not have been pleased that some had described his death as "passing", or even seeing RIP expressed by some.
Click to expand...

Well, I can understand the objection to ‘passing’, which I find tweely euphemistic, and the connotations of “passing over” to the nonexistent other side. I’m not sure I see such a problem with RIP; that his remains should be left somewhere undisturbed doesn’t seem at odds with a lack of belief in the afterlife (although it does go contrary to his expressed wish to have his ashes blown in Geller’s face).
 
Thrown, not blown!

Did he ever seem partial to any of the many options in the Dead Parrot sketch?
'Gone to meet his maker' is obviously out of the question. For an old showman like Randi, 'run down the curtain' seems appropriate, but I think he would probably have preferred something less euphemistic like 'bereft of life,' 'ceased to be' or 'is no more.'
 
zooterkin said:
Well, I can understand the objection to ‘passing’, which I find tweely euphemistic, and the connotations of “passing over” to the nonexistent other side. I’m not sure I see such a problem with RIP; that his remains should be left somewhere undisturbed doesn’t seem at odds with a lack of belief in the afterlife (although it does go contrary to his expressed wish to have his ashes blown in Geller’s face).
Click to expand...


I think RIP is, for an atheist, an empty meaningless platitude. Not quite hypocritical, that's putting it too strongly; I thinking it's unthinking carrying over of theist phrases and thinking, and, like I said, just an empty platitude if you're an atheist.

No one says, "RIP X's body underneath", or "RIp X's ashes". If you simply say "RIP" you may claim -- perhaps sincerely, perhaps not -- that that wish was in respect of the ashes. But when you explicitly say "RIP X", then either you're saying X is somehow that body, or those ashes, or the soul that will now "rest".

That's a lot of words about nothing at all! Except :

If you do it unthinkingly, fine. If you realize, and still deliberately do it, because that's such a small thing, that's fine too: after all, we do use words like "God forbid" and "damn" despite their meaninglessness to atheists, simply as a figure of speech. By all means think of RIP as a figure of sppech or a platitude, and still use it; or don't think about it, and use it; but if you think about it, and, having thought about it try to defend that term by claiming you meant the ashes, I'm afraid that's liable to get called out.

I've not had the privilege of knowing Randi, but what I hear about him leads me to think he'd have voiced my thoughts too. Although, not having known him, I may be wrong in thinking that.



eta: Ah, good, edit window's open still. On re-reading, that may have come out sounding, well, combative. That wasn't my intent! And quibbling away about a non-issue would be in poor taste, especially here in this thread. So, well, apologies if that post disturbed the tenor, the spirit, the atmosphere of this thread!
 
Last edited:
Chanakya said:
I think RIP is, for an atheist, an empty meaningless platitude. Not quite hypocritical, that's putting it too strongly; I thinking it's unthinking carrying over of theist phrases and thinking, and, like I said, just an empty platitude if you're an ...snip...
Click to expand...

He died on Tuesday......
 
Being inevitable doesn't make death comfortable. So yes, even atheists will look to platitudes and euphemisms to blunt the emotional effect. Nothing about atheism requires us to face sadness head-on. What we don't do is invent fantasies of continued existence. "Passed away" is accurate. "Passed on" implies something to pass on to, which I don't agree with. "No longer with us" is my preferred statement, whenever "He's dead, Jim" would be in poor taste.
 
JayUtah said:
This might help.
https://www.crowl.org/Lawrence/time/days.html
Click to expand...


Thanks.

TBH, though, I still don't get it. That's the etymology of these words, these day names. That has nothing to do with RIP, as far as I can see? (It's not as if RIP means 'x' today, and only historically and etymologically is linked to a very different meaning 'y' -- unlike Tuesday.)

Re. your subsequent post, I agree, no reason why atheists must carry some aversion for platitudes per se. Like I'd said in my post, we can use that phrase unthinkingly, or as a platitude we accept and use because it is unimportant (like 'God forfend' or whatever). But to try to actually and rationally justify RIP by saying it applies to the ashes seemed a stretch to me. If, as you say, "passing on" seems off, so would RIP, I should think, for exactly the same reason.

Anyway, I'll stop assaulting the horse now. I shouldn't have started at all, in fact, all things considered. Time and place. Apologies for the derail.
 
Last edited:
I agree that "passed" is unnecessarily antiseptic and never use it myself. It always leaves me wondering what or whom they passed, but it's apparently the euphemism of choice in polite society these days.

I don't object to "passed away", but always just say "died" myself.
 
Hell, even "Goodbye" is short for "God be with ye", if I recall correctly.

It doesn't worry me. It's no different than saying "God knows". Nor does saying "****** if I know" require intercourse to take place if I am to achieve illumination in the matter.
 
Chanakya said:
That has nothing to do with RIP, as far as I can see?
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. But it has to do with what you also said about carrying over theistic origins and concepts, often unthinkingly. Our day names follow from gods. We atheists don't care.

Anyway, I'll stop assaulting the horse now. I shouldn't have started at all, in fact, all things considered. Time and place. Apologies for the derail.
Click to expand...

We can honor the memory of James Randi in no better way than debating the historic and ongoing role of religion in language and society.
 
Chanakya said:
I think RIP is, for an atheist, an empty meaningless platitude. Not quite hypocritical, that's putting it too strongly; I thinking it's unthinking carrying over of theist phrases and thinking, and, like I said, just an empty platitude if you're an atheist.
Click to expand...


Yes, that is what I thought also, and although certain expressions may have origins that do not sit well with us, we can be discerning about the ones we use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom