Like it? Share it!

TAM! The Amaz!ng Meeting 2012 
Banner


Reason Rally Logo
 

Sign up for news and updates!






Enter word seen below
Visually impaired? Click here to have an audio challenge played.  You will then need to enter the code that is spelled out.
Change image

CAPTCHA image
Please leave this field empty

Login Form



Happy Hallowe’en, Harry! PDF Print E-mail
Swift
Written by Jamy Ian Swiss   
Sunday, 31 October 2010 14:00

This Hallowe’en marks the 84th anniversary of the death of the legendary escape artist, Harry Houdini. While on a major North American tour, Houdini was rushed to the hospital for emergency surgery, after days of suffering high fevers and abdominal pain. Doctors removed his burst appendix, but knew that, his body already wracked with peritonitis, he was beyond saving. His wife, Bess, was told he would not live out the night; the all but indomitable Harry, an extraordinary physical specimen at age 52, somehow fought off the grim reaper for a week, finally telling his wife he could no longer keep up the fight, and succumbing on October 31st, 1926.

Eighty-four years later, Houdini remains the most famous magician of all time — albeit that many experts and enthusiasts in the world of magic resent this status, since Houdini achieved his greatest performing success as an escape artist, even though he loved magic. His final tour consists of a show in three parts — escapes, magic, and a lecture/demonstration segment exposing the methods of fraudulent séance mediums — in effect, neatly highlighting the three chief elements of Houdini’s extensive career as a live performer.

Houdini’s careers in magic as well as escapology, aviator, filmmaker and movie star, author, book collector, and magic historian, are all fodder for fascinating stories in their own right. But we should particularly honor, this and every Hallowe’en, his career as a skeptic. While the link between magic and skepticism preceded Houdini by at least three centuries in the written record alone (marked with the publication of the classic Elizabethan text, The Discoverie of Witchcraft, by Reginald Scot, in 1584), and other magicians of the Edwardian era spoke out stridently against spiritualism both in the United States and Great Britain, nevertheless, Houdini crystallized the role of the magician in critical thinking, and the importance of having qualified magicians present when investigating self-proclaimed psychics. 

Houdini was a virtual birthing room witness at the arrival of parapsychology as an alleged science, taking part in the first Committee on Psychical Research, organized by Scientific American magazine. The committee offered a cash prize for evidence of an unexplainable supernatural ability, a tradition continued personally by Houdini, and revived a half century or so after his death by James Randi. Scientific American offered $2500; today, the JREF offers a million dollars for such a feat. 

Houdini demonstrated time and again the fact that scientists, academics, and other upstanding members of the community could readily be deceived by the tricks of the séance mediums; the same message that James Randi (with the help of Banachek (then Steve Shaw) and Michael Edwards) soundly dropped at the doorstep of the parapsychology community with his legendary Project Alpha. Scientists and academics receive no training in detecting deception; they are just as amazed by a professional magician as anyone else (you can trust me on this!).  After all, nobody ever heard of a sneaky amoeba. It takes one to catch one — and otherwise smart people can readily be taken in when their intellectual arrogance overtakes the limits of their expertise.  Many a skeptic has been embarrassed as a result — as indeed, at times, have skeptical magicians as well.

From its arrival in 1848, courtesy of the spirit “rappings” of the Fox Sisters in Hydesville, New York, Spiritualism became a popular religious fad that overtook the United States and Great Britain for the next 75 years. Houdini was greatly affected by the death of his mother in 1913 – he was overseas an unable to be at her bedside — and eventually became curious about spiritualistic claims. Thus this sincere and open-minded seeker was personally offended when faced with, what to him, was obvious and primitive magical trickery in the darkness of the séance chamber, used to manipulate the minds and wallets of the bereaved. Houdini’s moral outrage was thus fueled as he marched into war to battle the con-men-and-women of the Spiritualism. He continued to wage that battle until his death, and in truth, his final exposé, of the Boston medium Margery Crandon in 1925, virtually coincided with the death of séance mediumship, and the offering of physical phenomena as evidence for the supernatural. (The next significant claimant in that in that battle – an obscure Israeli magician named Uri Geller — would arrive on the scene about fifty years later, claiming to be endowed with supernatural abilities not courtesy of the dead, but rather gifted by aliens.) 

Houdini had spent a lifetime as the man whom no jail could hold, who could break any earthly bonds. Before his death he established a secret code with his wife, Bess, the two promising each other that whoever was first to die would in turn attempt to come back across the veil of life and death, to attempt to prove the existence of an afterlife. For ten years following Houdini’s death, Bess held an annual séance on Hallowe’en night, attempting to contact her dead husband. Her final attempt was held in 1936 on the rooftop of the Knickerbocker Hotel in Hollywood. At the conclusion of the séance, with no sign from her beloved, Bess spoke:

“Houdini did not come through. My last hope is gone. I do not believe that Houdini can come back to me, or to anyone. After faithfully following through the ten-year Houdini compact, using every type medium and séance, it is now my personal and positive belief, that spirit communication in any form is impossible. I do not believe that ghosts or spirits exist. The Houdini shrine has burned for ten years. I now, reverently, turn out the light. It is finished. Good night, Harry.”

And with that, she blew out the candle that she had kept burning in memory of Houdini.

But while Bess no longer sought to contact him, many others have continued the tradition – magicians and skeptics alike, in order to honor Houdini’s legend. Houdini collector and historian Sidney Radner has hosted many such gatherings; so has the Society of American Magicians, of which Houdini once served as President; JREF President, D.J. Grothe, took part in a number of such séances as the host of the Point of Inquiry podcast [one featured recordings of Houdini's final séance]; and this year, magician and escape artist Dorothy Dietrich, of the Houdini Museum in Scranton, Pennsylvania, will also continue the tradition.

So this Hallowe’en, light a candle and raise a toast to the late great Harry Houdini. He’s not likely to drop in on your costume party, but that shouldn’t stop skeptics from honoring the critically important role he played in 20th century skepticism. Happy Hallowe’en, Harry. 

[There is no end to available references about Harry Houdini’s life and career. Of the many biographies extant, I particularly recommend Houdini!!! The Career of Erich Weiss by Kenneth Silverman. Also, note this interesting exhibition currently under way at the Jewish Museum in New York City.]

Jamy Ian Swiss is a magician, author, speaker, and longtime skeptical activist. He serves as Chairman of the Advisory Committee to the President of the James Randi Educational Foundation.

 

Trackback(0)
Comments (46)Add Comment
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by lytrigian, November 01, 2010
Since lighting candles for the dead is of religious origin and 'toasting' originates from sacrificial libations in which a sacred liquid was offered to the gods, I shall be doing neither of the two as I find them inconsistent with critical thinking!


Since movable type was first used to print the Bible, you should refrain from reading any modern printed material. Since many of the techniques of modern chemistry originated with alchemy, you should refrain from using anything made from plastic. Since ceremonial academic garb originated with medieval clerical habits, you shouldn't get a college education...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +18
@lytrigian, Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by lytrigian, November 02, 2010
@popsaw: You're probably just a troll, but I'm bored.

Candlelight in memory of the deceased, drinking toasts... In modern life these are social customs quite divorced from their origins. Sure, the candle thing may have been -- and for many Christians, still is -- a religious rite. But the rite itself derives from a much more basic need: It's dark in here, so can someone please light some candles so we can see what we're doing? It's when they light candles there, during this ritual, or in this place, that it becomes a religious act.

A libation is actually the portion of a drink that is NOT drunk but rather poured out onto the floor. Waste of good booze if you ask me, and very likely to ruin the carpets. If I'm going to take a moment to celebrate someone's memory with drink, I have a much better home for it. ("Libation" as a term for drink in general is facetious, although this may be forgotten by the less well-informed.)

It doesn't matter either way. A social custom need not have a rational basis. Whatever their origins, most are, by now, purely conventional. Their origins are relegated to historical curiosities.

Am I, for instance, really pledging not to attack those to whom I'm introduced when I shake hands, by keeping my sword arm occupied? No, that's silly. I'm just saying hello politely.

Such customs are a method of maintaining cohesiveness within a group; conventional signs by which we express certain sentiments in commonly understood ways. They may or may not have symbolism attached to them, and that symbolism may or may not be similar to how they were formerly understood.

When it comes to lighting a candle in memory of the dead, I think even the strictest materialist need not reach too far to find meaning in the ephemeral nature of a beautiful chemical reaction.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
...
written by MadScientist, November 02, 2010
Thanks for the tip on the Houdini biography. I've often wondered myself why people say that Houdini was one of the greatest magicians when I knew him for his escape tricks and don't know many people who could name his magic tricks. Come to think of it, I know Randi for his escape tricks rather than magic tricks and can only recall him doing magic tricks as part of debunking claims by charlatans like Geller.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by lytrigian, November 02, 2010
@MadScientist -- One of my favorite books in my elementary school library was a collection of short biographies of well-known magicians, from Robert-Houdin up through Harry Blackstone Sr. (I can no longer remember either the title or the author.) Its section on Houdini was of course mostly about his escape acts. The only illusion I can recall described is one where he'd swallow some thread and some needles, and then pull the thread out of his mouth with the needles strung on it. (Might have been razor blades instead of needles.) And the only reason I remember that is because of the incident that happened during one performance when Houdini called up a random audience member to inspect his mouth first, and failed to recognize it was Groucho Marx without his painted-on mustache.

The answer to "Do you see anything in my mouth?" was "Pyorrhea."
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
@lytrigian
written by popsaw, November 02, 2010
Whilst my comments may not meet with your favour, there is no basis for the 'troll accusation. I merely state that I find such customs inconsistent with critical thinking since they support the notion of consciousness after death. The Tooth Fairy myth is a very old harmless tradition also but I would not perpetuate that myth either.
I accept however that the majority are not aware of the origins of toasting and candle lighting but I feel that my integrity would be compromised to continue with these customs in full knowledge of their meaning. Of course, that is my choice and I merely wished to explain my position.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -10
...
written by lytrigian, November 03, 2010
I took you for a troll because your position is ridiculous as stated. You really think that every time someone drinks a toast they're making an offering to the gods whether they know it or not?

The origin of a custom is not its meaning any more than the etymology of a word is its definition. Knowing a custom's origin helps explain why it is what it is, but it need not (and often DOES not) have anything to do with what it means NOW.

To refrain from them for the reasons you do is tantamount to some quasi-fundamentalist caricature of "critical thinking".
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
@lytrigian
written by popsaw, November 03, 2010
"I took you for a troll because your position is ridiculous as stated. You really think that every time someone drinks a toast they're making an offering to the gods whether they know it or not?"
I made it clear that most people do NOT know the origins of theses customs when I stated in my previous post "I accept however that the majority are not aware of the origins"
I then stated that it was a matter of integrity for ME not to taint my critical thinking and freeness of speech engaging in customs founded on supernatural/spiritistic practices and beliefs. I think you will find that many skeptics (including JREF members)do not celebrate Christmas for the very reasons I have stated. Perhaps they are fundamentalists too. If so, I gladly accept the label.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -5
...
written by Caller X, November 05, 2010
Since movable type was first used to print the Bible, you should refrain from reading any modern printed material. Since many of the techniques of modern chemistry originated with alchemy, you should refrain from using anything made from plastic. Since ceremonial academic garb originated with medieval clerical habits, you shouldn't get a college education...


Where did you learn that nonsense? College? Movable type was invented in 1040, and (if Wikipedia can be believed) the oldest extant book printed with movable type predates that Bible by over 75 years.

As for "libation"
A libation is actually the portion of a drink that is NOT drunk but rather poured out onto the floor. Waste of good booze if you ask me, and very likely to ruin the carpets. If I'm going to take a moment to celebrate someone's memory with drink, I have a much better home for it. ("Libation" as a term for drink in general is facetious, although this may be forgotten by the less well-informed.)


In modern times that's called "pouring out a 40 for my dead homies" so maybe you shouldn't listen to rap music.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by lytrigian, November 05, 2010
@CallerX: There are many good reasons for not listening to rap. (Note the omission of "music".) I need not add this one to the list though, as my point is that I do not accept popsaw's reasoning. What you think it has to do with toasting anyway, I don't quite get.

However, if you're seriously arguing that the independent invention of Gutenberg, which led to the modern publishing industry responsible for nearly all printed work available in the Western world ever since, was in any way connected to the earlier Asian invention of the same technology, you have an uphill battle.

It hardly matters for the purposes of illustration anyway. It's not as if popsaw's facts are in order. He imagines, for instance, that he knows toasting to have developed from pagan libations. The truth is that no one knows that. It's often presumed, but that's based on mere supposition, reaching for any ancient known custom that might possibly be related. There's no actual evidence for it.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
...
written by StarTrekLivz, November 05, 2010
The story of how Houdini became a debunker of spiritualism is particularly good: he was very attached -- maybe too much -- to his mother. When she died, he consulted mediums and spiritual advisers. It was no less than Lady Conan-Doyle (wife of the Sherlock Holmes author) who brought a written message from her to him, through a medium. Written in perfect British English. Frau Weiss never learned English: she was born and raised in Hungary, but preferred Yiddish. All the years she lived in America she depended upon Jewish merchants or friends to translate to be able to transact business in either Hungarian or Yiddish. He knew an English message must be false.

I did something similar when friends at a Halloween party had a psychic to entertain: she said she had contacted my grandmother. Some of her stuff seemed plausible (though she could have been clued in by our hosts). So I spoke in German, as I always did with my grandmother. Suddenly the psychic was not so responsive .....
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
@popsaw -- tainted by religion
written by StarTrekLivz, November 05, 2010
What a sad life you must lead! Although I do not believe in god, I enjoy putting up holiday lights on my house at Christmas, sending greeting cards (decidedly not religious) and giving (not to mention receiving!) presents. And this is just one example.

If one seeks to remove any activity that has a religious context, one will end up never eating, drinking, nor even sleeping and working, whether alone or with others. Relax, don't buy into the superstition, but enjoy the culture.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@StarTrekLivz
written by popsaw, November 06, 2010
The customs I have mentioned have origins exclusively in religious and spiritistic practice and are easily avoided without detriment. As for eating, drinking, sleeping and working. I do all of these without compromising my position since they do not originate or were not conceived for spiritistic, supernatural purposes.
I find your reasoning incompatible with true critical thinking when you "say don't buy into the superstition, but enjoy the culture." The culture of illogical thinking and woo woo is one the JREF is seeking to break down, not celebrate. This begs the question at what point does your condemnation actually kick in? If your answer is that you only condemn woo woo which is harmful such as homeopathy, it follows that your goal is merely to prevent harm and not to actually promote critical thinking. It would also be reasonable to conclude that any quackery that is harmless and may actually have a positive effect should not be challenged or condemned in favour of the mantra, "Relax, don't buy into the superstition, but enjoy the culture."
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
@lytrigian
written by Caller X, November 06, 2010
written by lytrigian, November 05, 2010
@CallerX: There are many good reasons for not listening to rap. (Note the omission of "music".) I need not add this one to the list though, as my point is that I do not accept popsaw's reasoning. What you think it has to do with toasting anyway, I don't quite get.


Your response, taken in toto, is an excellent example of what the Catholic Church likes to call "invincible ignorance." Please don't put words in my mouth. I was comparing pouring out a 40 with libations, not toasts.


However, if you're seriously arguing that the independent invention of Gutenberg, which led to the modern publishing industry responsible for nearly all printed work available in the Western world ever since, was in any way connected to the earlier Asian invention of the same technology, you have an uphill battle.


Again, don't put words in my mouth.
As to Gutenberg, I was simply objecting to a factually inaccurate assertion. To my credit, I was right. Balls on chin.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 07, 2010
The customs I have mentioned have origins exclusively in religious and spiritistic practice and are easily avoided without detriment. As for eating, drinking, sleeping and working. I do all of these without compromising my position since they do not originate or were not conceived for spiritistic, supernatural purposes.


Care to explain how pouring out a drink or any other liquid morphed into drinking a drinking a drinking a drink? No? Didn't think so. Being a "critical thinker" doesn't necessarily mean being a tighta$$.

How do you feel about gravestones? Balls on chin.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@Caller X
written by popsaw, November 07, 2010
I am afraid I do not actually understand your question so I can only state my position in the hope that it explains my reasoning. Toasting originates in strange and bizzare custom and carries the same today as it always did. Even now toasting it is steeped in woo woo and the paranormal.
Regarding headstones. They are a marker are they not. I don't see a problem symbolically or traditionally speaking.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
@ popsaw
written by StarTrekLivz, November 08, 2010
with respect, I thought Caller X properly named you .... like those ultra-liberal Politically Correct people who cannot do or say anything lest they offend other's sensibilities, you seem to have developed such a rarefied form of critical thinking that perhaps even you cannot live up to it.....

Meanwhile, I'm shopping for Christmas & Hanukkah presents with a smile on my face: I don't believe in the divinities, but I do like making the people in my family happy with gifts.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@ StarTrek Livz
written by popsaw, November 08, 2010
With respect,I am not offended by other peoples inconsistency. Rather, it is others that are offended when I highlight the incompatibility of debunking and criticizing or myths legends and supernatural bunkum and embracing it on the other. I believe it is harmful to society to promote supernatural, pagan ritual and is it not supposed to be the case that critical thinking promotes truth, not falsehood?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 09, 2010
written by popsaw, November 08, 2010
With respect,I am not offended by other peoples inconsistency. Rather, it is others that are offended when I highlight the incompatibility of debunking and criticizing or myths legends and supernatural bunkum and embracing it on the other. I believe it is harmful to society to promote supernatural, pagan ritual and is it not supposed to be the case that critical thinking promotes truth, not falsehood?


As John Candy used to say on SCTV, "May the Good Lord love you and blow you up real good!!!!" Just out of spite, I am going to make it my business to promote and engage in supernatural and pagan rituals with those who believe in them, and to bring new believers in, for the rest of this week.

Where's the nearest Roman Catholic church? I needs me a host! The Krishna temple has good vegetarian food, this is hungry work. Gotta buy candles, pour out a 40 (libation/not toast) for Martin Gardner, hope to JHVH1 I don't step on a crack. Hmm, googling "drum circle" now. You know what's great about pagan rituals? The poontang! Popsaw, do you wear a necktie, and if so, why? They're banned in Iran, so I think it would be almost obligatory for a skeptic to wear one (you don't get to use that as your answer, by the way).

While channel surfing last night, saw on public tv a thing about the Lakota version of the Sun Dance. The Indian informants (that's an anthropological term) talked about it like they were anthropologists... "We do this because this symbolizes the womb and we go back in and blah blah." The only thing they didn't say was "liminal state." That's another anthropolical term, feel free to google it. They seemed very clear on what they were doing and why.

No one's offended, Sheldon, unless you bring up your objections to bunkum at socially inappropriate times. Have you considered a manifesto to be sent out with your annual Christmas card? Would you accept a Christmas bonus? If so, why? If not, why not? Bazinga.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Haha. Popsaw is the most superstitious person here!
written by AndyL, November 09, 2010
Many socially useful traditions were originally given religious or superstitious explanations.

Any rational thinker would acknowledge that a ritualized opportunity to give a short speech during a meal serves a social purpose. So would they acknowledge that a day of family, parties, and feasting is most convenient when standardized.

Popsaw seems to have developed his OWN irrational superstition that anything that was at some point given a religious rationalization is forever tainted.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
@ AndyL
written by popsaw, November 10, 2010
Please do not twist my words as I did not say that speeches originate with the paranormal as you implied. I maintain that toasting is a paranormal/supernatural based ritual and for that reason I do not participate. Perhaps you do not believe it has these origins or perhaps you feel it has taken on a new meaning. If this is the case, why not state where you think the origins of toasting lie and explain it's new meaning, citing when this new meaning came in place and replaced the old one.
Here is a question for you...
Would you throw a coin into a wish fountain and make a wish because it is customary for visitors to that fountain?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by AndyL, November 10, 2010
"Please do not twist my words as I did not say that speeches originate with the paranormal as you implied. "

That's not what I implied! Please do not twist MY words!

"If this is the case, why not state where you think the origins of toasting lie and explain it's new meaning, citing when this new meaning came in place and replaced the old one. "

Its origins do not really interest me, for the sake of argument I will take your account of them as fact.
Currently they provide a ritualized method for giving a short speech or praise during a meal. This provides a social function. As an ice-breaker if nothing else. (That's why, of course, the practice has persisted long after it's origin is forgotten.)

You could, of course, just randomly shout out praise or something during the course of a meal, but if you're the sort of person who would find that awkward or uncool, there is an existing social mechanism to make it easier. The fact that it was originally used to appease the spirits or something doesn't make it any less useful for me to call attention to the fact that Bob is a great guy and that we'll all miss him after he retires. (And to agree with the sentiment by raising a glass.)
(Or, if you just want to celebrate the fact that you're drinking, a quick toast is a bit classier than just "CHUG! CHUG! CHUG!")

This is why people thought you were trolling, you seem to be claiming that people not only forgot the purpose of a tradition but that it serves no current purpose! You're claiming that people are doing things for literally no purpose at all! Not "no *good* purpose", which is entirely believable, but no purpose at all, which is simply not part of human nature.

For instance, if one spills salt, they might toss it over their shoulder. They do it for good luck. They certainly would not continue to do that if they didn't remember that it was supposed to bring good luck. (As people do not remember whatever spiritual thing toasts were supposed to do.)

The difference is that toasting still serves a purpose, but salt-tossing's purpose is purely superstitious.

It's strange to have to explain this.

"Would you throw a coin into a wish fountain and make a wish because it is customary for visitors to that fountain?"

Typically I only do this when it's made clear that the coins are collected for some purpose. (The upkeep of the facility or something.)
Even then I tend to forget to make a wish. I just enjoy throwing stuff into fountains.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 10, 2010
written by popsaw, November 10, 2010
Please do not twist my words as I did not say that speeches originate with the paranormal as you implied. I maintain that toasting is a paranormal/supernatural based ritual and for that reason I do not participate. Perhaps you do not believe it has these origins or perhaps you feel it has taken on a new meaning. If this is the case, why not state where you think the origins of toasting lie and explain it's new meaning, citing when this new meaning came in place and replaced the old one.


Gratuitously asserted, just as gratuitously denied. "I maintain" falls far short of being a valid argument, much less proof. Have you thought of doing your own research?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
@Caller X
written by popsaw, November 11, 2010
I maintain" falls far short of being a valid argument, much less proof. Have you thought of doing your own research?
Yes I have. That is why I confidently maintainsmilies/grin.gif, That which I have stated. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
I don't quite see the basis for your objection. Is it that you disagree with my statements regarding the origins of toasting or that you disagree with my non participation, or both?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 11, 2010
written by popsaw, November 11, 2010
I maintain" falls far short of being a valid argument, much less proof. Have you thought of doing your own research?
Yes I have. That is why I confidently maintainsmilies/grin.gif, That which I have stated. Do you have evidence to the contrary?
I don't quite see the basis for your objection. Is it that you disagree with my statements regarding the origins of toasting or that you disagree with my non participation, or both?


If you want to be a stick in the mud, fine. Why don't you present some of this research you claim to have done?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
@Caller X
written by popsaw, November 11, 2010
For your perusal...
The Encyclopædia Britannica (1910), Volume 13, page 121: “The custom of drinking ‘health’ to the living is most probably derived from the ancient religious rite of drinking to the gods and the dead. The Greeks and Romans at meals poured out libations to their gods, and at ceremonial banquets drank to them and to the dead.” The encyclopedia added: “Intimately associated with these quasi-sacrificial drinking customs must have ever been the drinking to the health of living men.”
Is that still valid? The 1995 International Handbook on Alcohol and Culture says: “[Toasting] is probably a secular vestige of ancient sacrificial libations in which a sacred liquid was offered to the gods: blood or wine in exchange for a wish, a prayer summarized in the words ‘long life!’ or ‘to your health!’”



I repeat...
Is it that you disagree with my statements regarding the origins of toasting or that you disagree with my non participation, or both?

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 11, 2010
While I congratulate you for actually doing some research, I question the reliability of your sources, but you showed your work. Weasel words: "most probably" & "must have ever been" & "probably". Brittanica is known for unreliability.

As to your question, I stand by my statement "If you want to be a stick in the mud, fine."
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
@
written by popsaw, November 11, 2010
I answered your question reasonably and satisfactorily citing a reliable source for further information... Google is your friend!
Your failure to address my own questions(Is it that you disagree with my statements regarding the origins of toasting or that you disagree with my non participation, or both? leaves me perplexed regarding the point of your post. It appears that your main contention is that I am a stick in the mud. My reply to that is that I would be willing to consider opposing evidence of the origins of toasting had it been offered and would I be willing to reconsider my non participation in toasting if a compelling reason had been offered.
smilies/wink.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 12, 2010
I've answered both of your questions by saying that if you want to be a stick in the mud, fine and pointing out that the Encyclopedia Britannica is noted for being unreliable. You write as if English is your first language, so your dog-with-a-bone-ness on these two points is puzzling. I can only imagine how much fun you are at weddings, birthdays, and funerals. Do you eat Thanksgiving dinner, its religious origins not withstanding? Would you like a free membership in Toastmasters?

Pouring out a drink is not drinking a drink. I can't make it any simpler. How do you feel about Gatorade being dumped on winning football coaches? Does that prevent you from watching football?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
...
written by popsaw, November 12, 2010
There are plenty of other references that confirm that the origins of toasting are supernatural/pagan. I ams sure you are aware of this though as you are in possession of Google?
Whether I am fun or not at parties is irrelevant. I do not participate in pagan or supernatural activity and that was my point. You have failed to qualify your objections, being unable to say say whether you are opposed to my non participation in pagan/supernatural custom or whether you dispute that the custom of toasting is supernatural.
Pouring out a drink is not drinking a drink. I can't make it any simpler. How do you feel about Gatorade being dumped on winning football coaches? Does that prevent you from watching football?

The article says "So this Hallowe’en, light a candle and raise a toast to the late great Harry Houdini."
These are religious/paranormal customs. I have no compunction about drinking without the toasting part.



report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 12, 2010
Whether I am fun or not at parties is irrelevant.


You're right, it assumes an invitation; I think we have already settled that question.



I do not participate in pagan or supernatural activity and that was my point. You have failed to qualify your objections, being unable to say say whether you are opposed to my non participation in pagan/supernatural custom or whether you dispute that the custom of toasting is supernatural.


JHVH1 Damn! I have answered your questions. Repeatedly. I am not your typing monkey. Now you answer mine.

Do you watch football, in spite of the risk of a Gatorade libation, and do you eat Thanksgiving dinner, in spite of its religious origins? Would you ever participate in a case before the Supreme Court, given the invocation of 'GOD' when the Court gets ready to do bidness? Do you use one dollar bills? Have you looked at one lately? You're a hoot, that's what you are. And a stick in the mud (the answer to your first question).


Pouring out a drink is not drinking a drink. I can't make it any simpler. How do you feel about Gatorade being dumped on winning football coaches? Does that prevent you from watching football?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 12, 2010
Oh, one more thing: I said "weddings, birthdays, and funerals." YOU said "parties". That's what we call "a clue."
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@CallerX
written by popsaw, November 13, 2010
Your questions will be answered when you have answered mine.
I neither watch football (not interested) nor eat thanksgiving dinner (not religious). However, with regard to football, my skepticism would prevent me from participating in any ritual that was of supernatural origin though I would not have any objection to watching a game since watching football itself is not an expression of supernatural belief and is not incompatible with critical thinking.
I would not swear on God or the bible in court. I would make a non religious affirmation as provided for min UK law.
Could you answer these questions you have avoided with a yes or no...
1) Are you opposed to my non participation in Toasting?
2) Do you dispute that the origins of toasting are in the supernatural/paganism?

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by Caller X, November 13, 2010
written by popsaw, November 13, 2010
Your questions will be answered when you have answered mine.


You contradict yourself, as you answer my questions below.


I neither watch football (not interested) nor eat thanksgiving dinner (not religious). However, with regard to football, my skepticism would prevent me from participating in any ritual that was of supernatural origin though I would not have any objection to watching a game since watching football itself is not an expression of supernatural belief and is not incompatible with critical thinking.
I would not swear on God or the bible in court. I would make a non religious affirmation as provided for min UK law.


Do you ever use US currency? Would you ever participate in a case in the US Supreme Court? For instance, one arguing against supernatural beliefs?


Could you answer these questions you have avoided with a yes or no...
1) Are you opposed to my non participation in Toasting?
2) Do you dispute that the origins of toasting are in the supernatural/paganism?


I have answered these questions, but I shall do so again, since I just looked up "dog with a bone" in the Encyclopedia Britannica and it said "see popsaw".

1) No, because you are just a stick in the mud

2) Yes.

I would suggest the reason you don't eat Thanksgiving dinner is you don't get invited, or as you imply, you live in a country where they don't have it. Only the US and Canada have it, albeit on different days.

Since you mentioned UK law, how do you feel about "God Save the Queen" and the Church of England? Pay taxes much? You're participating. Balls on chin.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
@CallerX
written by popsaw, November 13, 2010
I would not be endorsing that view 'In God We Trust' so I could use US currency without compromising my position. However, if expected participate in a ritual to demonstrate my trust in a deity, I would decline.
Since your only contention is that you do not accept my version of the origins of Toasting (yet you have not supplied your version of the 'truth'), here is some more proof that I am correct. I await the origins of toasting according to CallerX...
http://www.german-toasting-glasses.com/information_library/history_of_toasting.html
I would not be endorsing that view 'In God We Trust' so I could use US currency without compromising my position. However, if expected participate in a ritual to demonstrate my trust in a deity, I would decline.
Since your only contention is that you do not accept my version of the origins of Toasting (yet you have not supplied your version of the 'truth'), here is some more proof that I am correct. I await the origins of toasting according to CallerX...
http://www.german-toasting-glasses.com/information_library/history_of_toasting.html
I would not be endorsing that view 'In God We Trust' so I could use US currency without compromising my position. However, if expected participate in a ritual to demonstrate my trust in a deity, I would decline.
Since your only contention is that you do not accept my version of the origins of Toasting (yet you have not supplied your version of the 'truth'), here is some more proof that I am correct. I await the origins of toasting according to CallerX...
ion_library/history_of_toasting.html

Re.God save the Queen. I don't sing it or hold any value to it's sentiments. Church of England are in decline and taxes are not of supernatural or pagan origin. You gonna keep digging or can we call it game over?
Ps I would link to more sources but a spam warning prevents me from posting if I link more than one.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
Ignore previous (popsaw) post made in error
written by popsaw, November 13, 2010
I would not be endorsing that view 'In God We Trust' so I could use US currency without compromising my position. However, if expected participate in a ritual to demonstrate my trust in a deity, I would decline.
Since your only contention is that you do not accept my version of the origins of Toasting (yet you have not supplied your version of the 'truth'), here is some more proof that I am correct. I await the origins of toasting according to CallerX...
ion_library/history_of_toasting.html

Re.God save the Queen. I don't sing it or hold any value to it's sentiments. Church of England are in decline and taxes are not of supernatural or pagan origin. You gonna keep digging or can we call it game over?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
@ the error laden repetitive popsaw
written by Caller X, November 13, 2010
I am still not your typing monkey. I am not required to posit an origin of toasting, I have simply pointed out that your sources are unreliable and that pouring out a drink and drinking a dring are two different things. Following the Indian logician Nagarjuna, I say "neti, neti, neti." "Church of England are in decline"? Taxes pay for its head, do they not? You're wrong, I'm right, and I can do this forever. Except when I get invited to social occasions. There you have an advantage over me.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
...
written by popsaw, November 14, 2010
I was addressing the origins of 'toasting' and their basis in the supernatural since the article invited readers to join in a 'toast'. It is you that is deflecting the issue to one of drinking and the difference between pouring out a drink and drinking it.
It is courageous of you to be the one person to put your head above the parapet and declare that my sources are wrong. Are you actually disputing that the origins of toasting are in the supernatural? If so do you have evidence to support your claim and since you refute the accuracy of my sources, which source/s do you accept? As for your claim that taxpayers are participating in the supernatural by proxy, let's take that theory to it's logical conclusion. Your tax dollars fund weapons of war that kill innocent people do they not. Do you feel morally responsible since you are a taxpayer? However, my integrity is not on trial here is it so what relevance is your analogy? I hold that toasting originates in pagan/supernatural ritual and for that reason I do not participate. You dispute that it does despite being shown evidence.
More proof that Toasting originates in the supernatural...
http://ezinearticles.com/?The-History-of-Toasting&id=555005
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 14, 2010
written by popsaw, November 14, 2010
I was addressing the origins of 'toasting' and their basis in the supernatural since the article invited readers to join in a 'toast'. It is you that is deflecting the issue to one of drinking and the difference between pouring out a drink and drinking it.


Do you dispute that pouring out a drink and drinking a drink are different things? Motivation enters into it too. If I pour out a beer because it is skunked, is that ipso facto a vote for the supernatural?

It is courageous of you to be the one person to put your head above the parapet and declare that my sources are wrong. Are you actually disputing that the origins of toasting are in the supernatural? If so do you have evidence to support your claim and since you refute the accuracy of my sources, which source/s do you accept? As for your claim that taxpayers are participating in the supernatural by proxy, let's take that theory to it's logical conclusion. Your tax dollars fund weapons of war that kill innocent people do they not. Do you feel morally responsible since you are a taxpayer?


I acknowledge your recognition of my courage. As to killing innocent people, I'm fine with it. You still didn't answer: ever sing God Save the Queen?

However, my integrity is not on trial here is it so what relevance is your analogy? I hold that toasting originates in pagan/supernatural ritual and for that reason I do not participate. You dispute that it does despite being shown evidence.


From unreliable sources. Neti, Neti.

And puhlease, it's "its" not "it's".
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
...
written by popsaw, November 14, 2010
Why do you keep asking irrelevant questions whilst avoiding my relevant ones? I have never sang God save the Queen as I do not hold to it's implications as I answered five posts ago when I said "Re.God save the Queen. I don't sing it or hold any value to it's sentiments. "
I ask again...
Since you do not accept that toasting is of superstitious/supernatural origin, what is your understanding of itsorigins and which source/s do you consider reliable regarding this information?
Ps. The spelling /grammar police are the usual diversion when ones powers of reason have abandoned one. smilies/wink.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -2
@popsaw
written by Caller X, November 15, 2010
Again, not your typing monkey. I'm not required to provide an alternate theory, I simply negate yours. Neti, neti.

Ps. The spelling /grammar police are the usual diversion when ones powers of reason have abandoned one.



Good thing I only corrected your punctuation, so I'm in the clear on that one. Can you spot the punctuation error(s) in the quote above?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
...
written by Caller X, November 15, 2010
To be fair, I see I messed up the quote tag.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by popsaw, November 15, 2010
There may be a future for you in proof reading. There certainly isn't one in debating!
At least you concede that you are not able to disprove my claims regarding the origins of toasting.
End of discussion.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
...
written by Caller X, November 16, 2010
written by popsaw, November 15, 2010
There may be a future for you in proof reading. There certainly isn't one in debating!
At least you concede that you are not able to disprove my claims regarding the origins of toasting.
End of discussion.


I concede no such thing. Please don't put words or anything else (not that there's anything wrong with that) in my mouth.

I don't have to disprove your "claims" (claims? plural? really?). I simply negate "them" by pointing out that a) "they" make no sense, and b) "they" are based on unreliable sources.

In the world of the internet, phrases like "End of discussion" have a special technical meaning: "Look forward to my next post on this subject".
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
...
written by TDjazz, November 17, 2010
Interesting article on a fascinating individual. Thanks for the recommendation on the biography.

(Side note to JREF: I haven't been to this site for a few months, but I notice the articles still need copyediting. I "tripped" over the writing several times. Otherwise, it's a good piece.)
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
Last Updated on Sunday, 31 October 2010 14:31