Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities

June 16

Rorty for beginners?

After reading so many eulogies for Richard Rorty lately, I'm interested in learning more. What would be a good starting point for reading Rorty for a layman who took a handful of college philosophy courses many years ago? --69.227.128.60 01:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm a layman. I could read and understand (well, sorta) Wittgenstein. I couldn't make heads nor tales of Rorty. I'm interested in any solid answers we get here. What I did get, I didn't like, from a philosophical point of view, but I should be delighted to find that I was all wrong and all wet. (I often am.) Geogre 13:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest that you begin with Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Rorty's magnum opus, where he laid down his challenge to the central preoccupations of the western philosophical tradition from Descartes onwards. If you already have some grounding in philosophical concepts it should not be too difficult to penetrate. I would also suggest Rorty and his Critics, a collection of papers edited by Robert Brandom. This helps to put some of Rorty's themes within a wider intellectual perspective. And, Geogre, I make no comment on how wet or dry you may be, nor, for that matter, do I pass any judgement on Rorty's lasting value as a thinker! Clio the Muse 22:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I took just one university philosophy course, but I did not find Rorty difficult to understand and frankly enjoyed reading Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. I, too, recommend it. Marco polo 00:37, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Clausewitz and Tolstoy

Both Carl von Clausewitz and Leo Tolstoy wrote books which draw general conclusions about conflict from the historical experience of the Napoleonic Wars. Are there any points of similarity in their individual perspectives? General joffe 05:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, no, there are not: the conclusions both men draw about the nature of war are quite, quite different. In War and Peace, Tolstoy advances a philosophy of war, in which the individual, no matter how great, is subject to impersonal forces, and in the face of which specific actions, no matter how significant, have little or no bearing. In his seminal study On War, Clausewitz is far less interested in grand concepts, and universal notions, and much more in war as an instrument of policy, based upon a rational and predictable set of criteria. His philosophy is empirical and pragmatic. It is, in other words, that of a strategist concerned with a specfic set of problems. He takes pains to draw a clear distinction between war in the abstract and war as it is actually planned and fought. For Clausewitz war is "an act of violence intended to compell our opponent to fulfill our will." (On War, A. Rapoport, ed. 1976 p. 101) For Tolstoy even the will of Napoleon himself is irrelevant. For Clausewitz war is like a grand game of chess. For Tolstoy people themselves are the chess pieces. It is never entirely clear who the players are, other than 'History' and 'Destiny' in the style, it might be said, of ancient mythology. For Tolstoy war is drama; for Clausewitz war is science. Clio the Muse 01:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Once again, dear Clio, I am in your debt! General joffe 00:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Holy Roman Empire

When did the Holy Roman Empire cease being a somewhat unified state, capable of a single foreign policy, and become the mess of competing prince-bishoprics, duchies, and kingdoms it had become by its end? 208.114.153.254 05:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

It was pretty much always like that. It was unified under Charlemagne and Louis the Pious, but the Franks expected territory to be divided equally among their sons, so it began to fall apart after that (similarly, France was never a unified state until at the earliest the 13th century and maybe even as late as the 17th). The emperor very early on became an elected position, and while he had nominal authority during the Middle Ages, he never really had any territory of his own (like, say, the French king ruled Ile-de-France), and there was a constant struggle with the Papacy over various things (technically the emperor was only a king until the Pope crowned him; they both claimed authority to invest bishops; etc etc). The rulers of the counties and duchies and bishoprics within the empire sided with the emperor or the pope depending on the circumstances. It was a mess of competing territories by the 11th century, but it was made worse by the Reformation, and the Peace of Augsburg cemented that by declaring that each state could choose Catholicism or Lutheranism as its official religion. Who then would be loyal to whom? There was constant civil war after that, which were ended by the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, but Westphalia only further cemented the differences created at Augsburg, and it was easy for France, Austria, and others to take advantage of the Empire's internal weaknesses. Adam Bishop 16:15, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The emperor had no territory of his own as emperor, but how many HR emperors were not kings or dukes before their election? —Tamfang 01:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, right, I meant that there weren't usually any dynasties in the Empire, so the emperors had to territorial base, but of course they all ruled something before they were elected. But the Habsburg dynasty slipped my mind! Adam Bishop 01:27, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

My empire is of the imagination. So says Ayesha, the sorceress queen in She, the novel by H. Rider Haggard. In a sense the Holy Roman Empire was also of the 'imagination.' It was an ideal that never quite became a reality, and never developed in any meaningful sense as an integrated state. The maps showing the imperial borders, even before it turned into a crazy patchwork of political and religious entities, are actually quite deceptive, because even at its height under Charlemagne and Otto the Great, the Empire was always a federation to a lesser or a greater degree. Charlemagne created a Universal State, in other words, with roots in the old Germanic tribal system. Over time tribal chieftans turned into kings and princes in their own right; and thus the Emperor, no matter how much reverence was attached to the title, was never in the strictest sense a 'monarch.' After Charlemagne the closest they ever got to the old Roman form was as primus inter pares-first among equals-and sometimes not even that.

Beyond this, the Empire, from the very outset, was shaped around a dangerous political contradiction: that between the 'Universal State' and the 'Universal Church.' Charlemagne's Frankish empire arose at a time of papal weakness; but once the papacy began its steady ascent, from the tenth century onwards, the struggle between Church and Empire was to become one of the great defining features of the early Middle Ages. There were points when this struggle broke down into outright civil war between the Imperial faction or the Ghibellines, on the one hand, and the Papal faction or the Guelphs, on the other. The struggle reached its height during the reign of the Emperor Frederick II of the House of Hohenstaufen and Pope Innocent IV, with the Papacy emerging as the final victor. After the death of Frederick in 1250 the whole Empire made an ever more rapid descent into the twilight, and was no longer taken seriously as an entity in European power politics. The later Emperors, from Henry VII onwards did have a distinct territorial power base, contrary to the point made by Adam, which introduced an additional element of rivalry, contributing still further to the decline.

I began with a quote, so I will end with a quote, that of Voltaire, which serves best as the Imperial epitaph-The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman nor an Empire. Clio the Muse 00:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

And here I thought that quote came from Linda Richman.  :) Corvus cornix 02:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm always surprised by the things one discovers here. Is Linda rich, is she a man, or is she both? Discuss. Clio the Muse 22:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Creating a New Page

Creating a Wikipedia page:

  How can I add a new topic? I'm a published author in the genre "the old west & its pioneers."

  Dr. Dennis McLelland

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Livereatingjohnston (talk • contribs)

Hi, Dr. McLelland. Just follow this link for instructions. --Rrburke^(talk) 15:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! You will first need to createa an account and wait a few days. If you areticle is about somethihng other than yourself or your own works, then just create your article. If you are considering an article about yours self or your works, please read WP:COI and WP:N first. If you are conderned that your article may violate WP:COI, then create it initially as a subpage of your user page and then ask for comments.

In general, the reference desk is for questions about content. Questions such as yours get better help at WP:HELP -Arch dude 17:32, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Fruits in Islam

Are there any fruits that play a symbolic role in Islam, like the apple in Christianity? (also in other major religions if anyone knows) - Thank you. --AlexSuricata 17:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I believe oranges are fairly significant... You can check our article on Islam. 24.1.137.20 18:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

While this is about trees, and not fruits specifically, you might find some of what you're looking for here. ◄Zahakiel► 18:55, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

If the Garden of Eden has anything to do with Christianity, in one corner of the Garden of Eden lies a fruit tree not necessarily an apple tree and a fountain of flowing water. If I am wrong, please excuse me. --Mayfare 19:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

You're correct. The fruit of the Tree of Knowledge was never identified; tradition considered it to be an apple, but there's really no basis for that. Grapes, on the other hand, do have significant symbolic value in both Judaism and Christianity. ◄Zahakiel► 19:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe dates, which are at least economically important in Arab countries. Adam Bishop 20:56, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Dates are, for example, recommended for iftar (breaking the fast).[1] It is not clear, though, that this has a symbolic meaning. Is a date, destined to be eaten, a date with destiny?  --Lambiam^Talk 21:11, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

There were two distinguished trees in the Garden of Eden, actually: the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the Tree of Life. The former was the prohibited one, which, Genesis says, Adam and Eve ate from. Presumably, they were supposed to eat from the second, although that is not explicitly stated. In any case, apples are not mentioned. (And meanwhile, I know nothing about fruit symbolism in Islam.) --Tugbug 20:40, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Not that I have any particularly good evidence to back it up, but I believe the word 'apple' came from an older (Saxon?) word that referred generically to fruit, which is maybe where the mix-up occurred. Confusing Manifestation 02:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

You may want to check our article on Pomegranates. Matt Deres 16:45, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Edgar Allan Poe

Hello. Most of Poe's short stories are terror and horror. The protagonist instead of the antagonist often seems deranged. Why did Poe write so many stories of this kind?--Mayfare 17:47, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

From his article, "Poe died at the age of 40. The cause of his death is undetermined and has been attributed to alcohol, drugs, cholera, rabies, suicide (although likely to be mistaken with his suicide attempt in the previous year), tuberculosis, heart disease, brain congestion and other agents." This probably offers some insight into his personal life; although the cause was indeterminate, the likely suspects certainly show his peers' perception of his activities, and his physical health was not the best either. ◄Zahakiel► 18:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Why does any author write in the fashion he or she does? I suppose it comes down to a mixture of talent, interest, motivation and a degree of awareness of what is likely to attract the reading public. I think it is certainly true that Poe was interested more in psychological themes than many of his predecessors in the 'Gothic' style, but that I take to be a sign of both his originality and his genius. And as far as notions of what is and what is not deranged are concerned, is there any better twist to this than in the story of The Gold-Bug? Poe is very much a genre writer; and while horror was one such genre he made effective use of, there are others, most notably science fiction and crime. In fact the character of C. Auguste Dupin, who appears in Murders in the Rue Morgue and other stories, anticipates such famous detectives as Sherlock Holmes. Poe was also a very good essayist and a decent poet; so I do not believe his art in the most general sense is reduceable to any given set of personal circumstances. Clio the Muse 01:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Zahakiel and Clio the Muse. If anyone would like to add more to this question, they are more than welcome to do so. --Mayfare 20:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Not so sure about the premises, here. There was a great deal of madness being written about at the same time. From Prometheus Unbound to the Victorian obsession with madness, there was keen interest in the idea of the refined sensibility. If, as they thought, an artist was a person whose faculties were sharpened and whose imagination was unbounded, then what happened if those sensibilities took just a slightly greater turn, those imaginations a larger leap? Poe's crazy people are all images of artists. He does not deal in run of the mill crazy, but always with the overly sensitive and the ideé fixe mad. Note that Freud was, at nearly the same time, positing his theory of poetic madness, and Coleridge had already done something not too dissimilar (based on/stolen from, whatever, Schiller). These are not, therefore, insane people written because Poe was nuts, or because nuts were more common, but rather as a sort of zeitgeist-wide preoccupation with sensibility, the meaning of civilization, and theory of mind. At least it seems that way to me, even though Poe was probably pretty nuts, too. Utgard Loki 13:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I think these are all valid contributing factors... it's probably not possible to narrow it down to any small subset of causes, but perhaps we get as close as we can by considering a blend of demand for that kind of writing due to the spirit of the age, the author's tastes (which may or may not be related to the various personal factors mentioned in his entry) and the other literary influences available at the time. ◄Zahakiel► 17:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

June 17

Greece or Rome

Which civilization contribute more stuff to the modern world? Was it Greece or Rome? I know that Pythagorean Theorem was contributed by Pythagoras, a Greek mathematician. Is there more from Greece or Rome? Please answer this question. Does the Wikipedia have a article about contributions? And this is not homework.

How do you guage contributions? Would things like the Parthenon count since it is still (mostly) standing? Dismas|^(talk) 04:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

As asked this is basically unanswerable. What does "stuff" mean? The Roman Empire contributed greatly to pre-modern Europe, but the rediscovery of ancient Greek writings (mainly thanks to Islamic and Jewish copies) goes hand-in-hand with the origin of the modern era. It's a toss up. Pfly 05:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

(from a regular at the maths desk) The Pythagorean theorem was known (and well understood) to the babylonians, at least a thousand years before Pythagoras lived. Or didn't live, since his non-existence is (I'm told) a perfectly reasonable scholarly position. Greece did give us science at and maths, though. Algebraist 10:48, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-existence is a bit strong, but you're right that little can reliably be ascribed to Pythagoras himself. In any case, if we're going to recognize the Greeks in this domain, it should be for the introduction of rigorous standards of proof. Anyone who has read Euclid will know that there was nothing remotely of the kind in Mesopotamia or Egypt. Wareh 16:28, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Very roughly speaking, the Greeks were better at science and the Romans better at technology (especially when it was war-related). But the Romans also borrowed a lot from the Greeks (and improved on it), but not vice versa (afaik). Especially in terms of adding new knowledge, my bet is on the Greeks. DirkvdM 11:05, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2007 June 13#Civilizations, question 9.  --Lambiam^Talk 12:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

My bet is on the Romans, as the spectrum of Greek civilization, and the Hellenistic era was so HUGE, that most historians and academics fixate only on the [Age of Pericles] (the "Golden Age of Athens) which only lasted 100 years. The Glory of Greece is ONLY Athens? Sparta is used for contrast, but few historians claim it to be the apex of Greece. What about the dozens of other city-states? The truth of the matter is, when Ancient Greece is mentioned in any context, nine times o ut of ten the author is mentioned Age of Pericles, and let us not forget how it died: plague, war and execution of Socrates.

Roman accomplishments include their great longevity from Republic to Empire to Breaking, roughly 12 centuries. Archictecture, modern government, war, multicultural influence, agriculture, roads, water transport, influence and effectiveness of law and common rights, etc. etc. It is my belief that most modern governments are not Greek in basis or influence, but rather most like Rome. Zidel333 15:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe instead of asking in terms of Greece or Rome, it would be better (though still unanswerable!) to compare Hellenistic civilization with Ancient Rome, with Greco-Roman lost in the middle. After all, Rome is just a city, and Greece a small peninsula. I don't think those are what is meant by "which civilization". While we're at it, does the Hellenistic "Greek" eastern half of the Roman Empire count for the Greek or the Roman civilization? Pfly 05:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Good point. What is the Roman civilisation? Of course there is a pure Roman background to it, but it assembled other cultures (including gods, with christianity possibly the most influential adoption). Romans were a bit like the Borg - "resistance is futile and you will be assimilated". Except that the assimilation worked the other way around as well. Same with the EU. The EU10 may have had the idea that they 'assimilated' the eastern European countries, but of course that worked the other way around as well, which is causing some unrest ("The Polish are coming!"). DirkvdM 06:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

"But apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system, and public health ... what have the Romans ever done for us?" [2] Gandalf61 14:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Of course the Romans didn't invent all that (or any of that). But given their '1000 year rule', it would have been surprising if they didn't have some impact on them. Like I said, they borrowed and improved on things, but they didn't invent all that much (maybe I'm overstating this). DirkvdM 07:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Vanity Fair

In Thackery's novel Vanity Fair there is a reference to Sir Pitt Crawley's 'blood-red hand.' I can't make any sense of this. Does anyone know what it means? Gordon Nash 17:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

see: Red Hand of Ulster.—eric 18:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely. Sir Pitt is a Baronet of the order created by James I in May 1611, to help finance the raising of fresh troops for the army in Ulster. All such baronets were allowed to display the Red Hand of Ulster on their coat of arms, either on a canton or an escutcheon. Clio the Muse 22:20, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Interestingly, the Red Hand of Ulster, as used in the flag of the province of Ulster, is a right hand, while the red hand that baronets are allowed to display is a left hand.  --Lambiam^Talk 22:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that the difference between "king" and "not-king?" Heraldry might document it, but left and right mean a lot in it. Utgard Loki 13:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The Baronet article claims it was somehow a mistake, but it is unclear as to whether that claim is supported by references or not, there are many problems with the citations in that article.—eric 15:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Identification of photography on wall in Israel

Dear Sir/Madam,

I found this while browsing the pictures of the official Orphaned Land myspace. Can anyone identify the individual pictured on the left, who seems like someone notorious in Israel ? Matt714

Thanks in advance.

It looks like Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the late Rebbe of Chabad-Lubavitch. I wouldn't say he's "notorious" unless you're an opponent of that group. -- Mwalcoff 21:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The doctrine of Mishichism, teaching that Menachem Mendel Schneerson will be the Messiah who will lead the Jewish people to redemption, is quite controversial among Hasidic Jews, and Orthodox Jews in general.  --Lambiam^Talk 22:11, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer Mwalcoff, and Lambiam as well for the additional information. Sorry for the use of the word "notorious", I erroneously thought it was a positive word. Famous would of been a better suited word. Matt714

It can be used neutrally, but rarely is. Still, I'd rather be called notorious than infamous, which is definitely negative. —Tamfang 09:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Joke: Chabad-Lubavitch: The modern religion most similar to Judaism. Gzuckier 19:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

William James

Hello, this is the first time I have visited the reference desk. My question: are there any articles on WP specifically titled or about any of James's writings themselves, such as for instance the lecture series from 1906-1907, published under the title, I seem to remember, Pragmatism? Thanks for any assistance, I have tried search in Wp and Google, so I will keep on looking anyway in the mean-time. —Newbyguesses - Talk 23:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Aside from the pages on William James himself and the more general page on Pragmatism, there are pages on some of James' published work, including Principles of Psychology, Will to Believe Doctrine, The Varieties of Religious Experience and Essays in Radical Empiricism. None of these, I have to say, are of a very high order. Clio the Muse 23:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that valuable list of articles. This reading will be useful to me. I have to hand a 2000 edition which includes the full text of James' eight lectures (Pragmatism and Other Writings, Penguin Classic) and access to further Library material on James. I will be looking through bibliographies and such, maybe that is a way for me to go about adding worthwhile material, to improve any article that shows signs of distress. Though I am not contemplating major work, nor initiating new articles at the present time, that would be a future project needing more preparation. Thanks again – Newbyguesses - Talk 01:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I am always pleased to help. You may like to note, on the assumption that you do not already know this, that The Varieties of Religious Experience is also available in Penguin Classics. Some of the other James' texts are published in Dover and Bison editions. However, the one that may be of most interest to you is A Pluralistic Universe, based on his Oxford University lectures of 1908 and 1909. It was in these he developed his arguments against absolute idealism and intellectualism in philosophy: the world is not a 'uni-verse' but a 'multi-verse'. Marvellous stuff! Clio the Muse 05:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Better yet, if all you want are the words of James, Varieties has been published in thrift editions. I'm not sure, but I think there is a Dover Thrift (least expensive quality book you can get). I know that Barnes & Noble (ugh) has an inexpensive edition. The problem with any of these, and particularly the last, is that the apparatus varies from weak to useless. Dover is commendable precisely because they have good editors. B&N is catch as catch can and varies from moderately good to not good at all (their Histories of Herodotus is weak, and their Metamorphoses is actually wretched, as they appeared to take a school boy translation with some of the least helpful emendations ever). Utgard Loki 13:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

June 18

Tamil

Which states of Sri Lanka speak Tamil the most?

You might want to ask this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sri Lanka. Corvus cornix 02:34, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Our article on the Tamil language states that it was the first language of the majority in the North Eastern Province (since split into the Northern Province and the Eastern Province.) You might also be interested in the figures for population by district and ethnic group from the 1981 and 2001 censuses from the Sri Lankan Department of Census and Statistics.—eric 04:31, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Have we no map of the territory claimed by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam? The map I occasionally see in magazines shows a strip along the north and east coasts. —Tamfang 09:08, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The area claimed by the Liberation Tigers is not necessarily the same as the area where Tamil is the prevailing language. The Tigers claim some areas that have mixed populations, including some where Sinhalese is probably more popular. Marco polo 14:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Note that if you use the Sri Lanka Census data, the Sri Lankan government distinguishes between "Sri Lankan" and "Indian" Tamils, a distinction that is rejected by many Tamils in Sri Lanka, and that both groups speak Tamil. Also, members of the group known as Sri Lankan Moors generall speak a form of Tamil as their first language. To find what part of the population of a given district speaks Tamil, you will need to add the figures for these three groups. Marco polo 19:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Signe Lund-Skabo

I have a book with different classical pieces of music for solo piano by various composers that I play from occasionally. There is one prelude that I have started playing. The prelude is by a composer named "Signe Lund-Skabo". I like the piece a lot, so I decided to do some research on this composer. However, I can hardly find any information on the man. Does anyone know anything about this elusive composer? Stevearius 00:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

How about translating her piano work into midi format so that we can all hear it please? 80.0.98.213 18:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Signe is a female name. I've never heard of her, none of the music reference books I have access to make any mention of her, and I can find precious little about her on Google, but here a few things that might bear out further research:

This site refers to the composer as “den norske komponistinnen Signe Lund Skabo”, which my almost non-existent Norwegian tells me she was a woman. This is confirmed by --

this, which seems to be a mini-biography of her in Norwegian, including a picture of her portrait.

Unfortunately all it tells is how she came to buy the largest house in the town of Loshavn, including some quotes from her autobiography. The entire site is focused on the history of the town. Regardless, there doesn't seem to be any better internet source on her. 84.239.133.38 18:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

This tells us she lived 1868-1950, and lists a handful of her works.

This article on the (presumably) Norwegian Wikipedia is a list of pieces played by Kjell Baekellund includes “Skumring” by Lund-Skabo.

This gives some detail of one of her songs. -- JackofOz 02:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Area of Behavioral Science

I really love what you are doing on this site, though am new in this site but i've been able to solve some of my problems. keep up the good work and more power to your elbow.

Please can you assist me by sending me an answer or a site that can find a solution to this question THE WAY THINGS LOOK MIGHT NOT BE THE WAY THINGS ARE, what area of Behavioral science best describe or explain the statement. Mabel

Unless you are looking for optical illusions, you might try phenomenology. No doubt other people will be along with a few more ideas...--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Clarification: Just to clarify, which specific aspect(s) of Behavioral science do you consider relevant? Are you also considering solutions from Cognitive psychology? dr.ef.tymac 13:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't seem to me like an issue that's relevant to Behavioral Science at all. I'd start with Rene Descartes' method of systematic doubt, and George Berkeley's argument from perceptual relativity. Llamabr 14:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

There are also the notions of hallucination (not really studied in Behavioral Science) and deception (more like it). Wrong assumptions based upon false appearances play a role in decision making, as they can contribute to cognitive biases. It might help to focus more if you could give an example of what you have in mind by way of something not looking the way it is. Are you thinking more of a cheese sandwich looking like the Virgin Mary, or of Enron looking like a respectable and thriving company?  --Lambiam^Talk 16:20, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The short "solution" is that we never actually know how things are, we only ever know how they look, feel, taste, smell or sound. From that, we deduce how they "are", but there's never any guarantee that one's deduction is accurate, because there's nothing we can measure it against. -- JackofOz 22:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

What's the matter? Never mind. What's to mind? Never matter. Clio the Muse 00:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Cannon in the Hundred Years War

I'm starting work for a paper on the use of cannon in the Hundred Years War. I've found some information in this encyclopedia, though not a lot. Does anyone have any more details? Bryson Bill 10:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I presume you've found our articles on the Battle of Crécy and the Battle of Castillon, but if not, both are relevant. Hopefully our real history expert will be with you shortly.  --Lambiam^Talk 15:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

From the arsenal of hell came the gun, soon to make such an impact on popular consciousness that Geoffery Chaucer was able to write in the fourteenth century that foul words were spread "as swift as a pelet out of a gonne, when fyr is in the poudre ronne." In 1326, Prince Edward, soon to be king of England, was first made aware of the use of guns in warfare in a manuscript presented to him by one Walter de Milimete. He was quick to appreciate the potential of the new weapon, though at this stage of their development they were "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Even so, several years later, now as King Edward III, he purchased several firearms, probably of Florentine make. These are mentioned in a 1339 Tower of London inventory: "Also, in the Chamber of the Guildhall, there are six instruments, of latone, usually called 'gonnes, and five rolares to the same. Also pellets of lead for the same instruments, which weigh four hundredweight and a half. Also, 32 pounds of powder for the said instruments."

While we cannot be absolutely sure, it is possible that English firearms first saw action in the Hundred Years' War in 1340 at the Battle of Sluys, because the royal cog, Christopher, is said to have been armed with guns-possibly the latten from the Tower-as well as longbows. Edward most certainly deployed, and used, some of his guns at Crecy in 1346. As the war progressed the guns was to become increasingly significant, especially as a siege weapon. Experimentation led to the development, amongst other things, of the mortar, a short, fat gun capable of firing balls at a high trajectory over walls. Other specialised weapons were introduced, including the long and thin culverins. However, in the long run, it was the French, not the English, who obtained the greatest advantage from the new technology. It was they who were the first to make effective use of firepower in pitched battle, beginning with Formigny in April 1450, where culverins broke-up the hitherto indomitable English longbowmen. Field artillery were also responsible for the final French victory at Castllion three years later. The gun was an unorthodox weapon, best used, as the French discovered, in an unorthodox fashion. Clio the Muse 22:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Might I note that the Germans at Tannenberg used cannon to a significant extent -- and the Hussites in the Hussite Wars much more successfully -- before Formigny. 70.16.4.233 04:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

And the Chinese well before either of these. But you will note that the question is about the use of cannon in the Hundred Years' War. Clio the Muse 04:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I was merely commenting on your comment that the French were the first to make effective use of firepower in pitched battle (which the Chinese did not do to any great extent at all). 70.16.4.233 04:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Leninism

How is Dictatorship of the proletariat different from Totalitarianism?
Zain Ebrahim 15:29, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

See proletariat. Arguably, this is "dictatorship by the people," which is no dictatorship at all. It is the idea that all of the people together will have the dictator's powers, with no professional class of politician or capital owners at all intervening. If it were to occur, there would be no one oppressed, because all would be the corporate body of the dictator. Totalitarianism is personalized control of a state apparatus (meaning loads of bureaucracy and management as a professional class) that is the opposite of the dream of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Utgard Loki 16:39, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Dictatorship of the proletariat is a more immediately relevant article. One should distinguish between the somewhat vague concept as developed in original Marxist theory, and Lenin's conception of it, in which the Bolshevik party kindly "assists" the working class by imposing this dictatorship on its behalf – we know how that turned out. On the other hand, Bakunin, in his criticism of Marxism, had warned from the start that the dictatorship of the proletariat would turn into oppression: "If you took the most ardent revolutionary, vested him in absolute power, within a year he would be worse than the Tsar himself."  --Lambiam^Talk 21:51, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

As Lambiam quite rightly says, the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' is possibly one of the least well-defined concepts in the whole of the Marxist canon. In terms of concrete political practice this was to have a particularly serious impact, because it is also one of the most central.

The root cause of the problem is that Karl Marx himself wrote far more about Capitalism than he ever did about Communism. The 'dictatorship of the proletariat' is mentioned for the first time in rather vague terms in a letter of 1852, where he suggests that it will 'emerge' as the outcome of the ongoing class sruggle. It was to take another twenty years before it had a second outing, this time in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, where Marx made essentially the same vague pronouncement: "...between capitalist and communist society lies the period of revolutionary transformation...Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat." The problem this presented for those who followed was simply this: in what fashion or manner would this coercive use of political power lead to the second great element of Marxist eschatology-the 'withering away' of the state?

This core problem was to lead to some incredible intellectual contortions, with Karl Kautsky, the leading German Marxist thinker at the beginning of the twentieth century, suggesting that it simply meant 'majority rule', since the proletariat were the 'majority' of the people in advanced industrial societies. But the man who came closest to the truth was another German socialist, Edouard Bernstein, who argued that Marx had derived the concept from Auguste Blanqui, who in turn was looking back to the forms of dictatorship established during the First French Republic by Robespierre and the Committee of Public Safety, which, in turn, harked back to the forms of emergency dictatorship established during the time of the ancient Roman Republic.

So, the concept, regardless of the setting, always had authoritarian roots. The best that can be said of it is that, in the manner of Kautsky, in advanced capitalist societies the dictatorship of the proletariat would replace the 'dictatorship of the bourgeoisie', achieving a higher form, in other words, of popular democracy. But what about less advanced societies like Russia, with an active Marxist intelligentsia and a relatively small urban working-class? We are now in the world of Leninism, of 'substitutionism', if you like, where the revolutionary vanguard stands in the place of the revolutionary worker.

For Lenin and his Bolshevik Party the working-class, left to its own devices, was only capable of lower forms of consciousness, usually centering around trade union struggles. The Russian Revolution of 1905 and 1917 might, indeed, be said to have established in the Soviets nascent forms of direct democracy, in contrast with 'bourgeois' parliamentary instituitions, like the Duma and the later Constituent Assembly. But the Bolsheviks, in pursuit of their own revolutionary doctrines, were quick to seize complete control of the Soviets, removing all rival voices in the working-class movement, Social Revolutionaries and Mensheviks alike. In the end the Soviets were no more than auxilary agencies of the state, and the dictatorship of the proletariat no more than the outright dictatorship of the Communist Party; and the dictatorship of the Communist Party the dictatorship of one man. Bakunin-and Bernstein-were both absolutely correct. Clio the Muse 00:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Very enlightening responses. Thank you. I totally misunderstood the concept of dictatorship of the proletariat. Although, practically speaking, I probably wasn't that far off. I'll read over the links you guys provided and I'll be sure to come back here after more misunderstandings.
Zain Ebrahim 13:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The unexamined life

"The unexamined life is not worth living." To whom is this quote attributed? Can you provide me with a source? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 17:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC))

The unexamined life is not fit for human living—Socrates, in Plato's The Apology of Socrates.—eric 17:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

For your future information, just typing "Template:Websearch" into Google will give you the answer. --TotoBaggins 20:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC)

Hello. I would like to know how many members European Coal and Steel Community includes now? I know that ECSC was founded in 1951 by France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands and the organization subsequently expanded to include all members of the European Economic Community. If ECSC still exists? If yes, How many members it includes now? Thanking you in anticipation.

It doesn't. See European_Coal_and_Steel_Community. 84.239.133.38 18:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Gaul/De Gaulle

Is there any relation between the names of Gaul and Charles de Gaulle? Or is it just a coincidence that France's strongest modern leader shared a name similar to his country's? 209.190.233.66 17:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It's a neat coincidence; "de Gaulle" is actually a corruption of the German name "De Walle"; see French name. Laïka 17:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I love those sort of historical coincidences! If only there was a book of them... 66.112.244.146 03:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)MelancholyDanish

The web is full of them, eg. [3], which on a very quick scan I see contains a fair bit of rubbish, but it might also have some gems of interest. -- JackofOz 05:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Romeo and Juliet Themes and Motifs

Are there any themes and motifs for Romeo and Juliet that virtually every literary expert would agree with? Are there any that are disputed or have various interpretations? If so, can you point me to a source so that I can make some progress on Romeo and Juliet?--Romeo in love 17:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It's a tragedy dominated by the twin themes of love and hate: I imagine that just about every critic would agree on that. I cannot really say more, other than suggest that you try a google search for critical interpretations of the play. Perhaps you might find something of value in William Hazlitt's little essay on Romeo and Juliet in Character's of Shakespeare's Plays? He says that Romeo is Hamlet in love, arguably the most perceptive judgement of all. Clio the Muse 01:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

A tragedy of hastiness.--Wetman 04:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

If you wanted, you could point out how this play - shown to the general public - depicted lords and ladies going through terrible tragedies that end in death. Apparently, the public of the time enjoyed watching the higher class people suffer. I wonder if any comparison could be made to modern people. --Kainaw ^(talk) 14:27, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

European Union

Hello, What structures does European Union have? Thanks.

Quite a lot, if by 'structures' you mean 'institutions'. The primary ones are the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of Ministers and the European Council, and there's also a European Court of Justice to interpret EU law. Take a look at the main Institutions of the European Union article. Random Nonsense 21:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

June 19

Non-Hazara Shi'ites

Which Shi'ite Muslims are non-Hazara?

Almost all of them. See Demographics of Islam for a distribution. Hazara are only found in Afghanistan (mostly), Pakistan and Iran, so you can safely assume that the Shia elsewhere are not Hazara. It is also worth noting that not all Hazara are Shia, some are Sunni. - BanyanTree 01:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Long Poems

Hi! I'm looking for recommendations for long poems, preferably Romantic and in blank verse, but really anything will do. To give you an idea, here's a list of my favorites:

• The Biblical books of Isaiah and Hosea
• Shakespeare's later Romances, especially The Tempest and Cymbeline
• Paradise Lost and Comus by Milton
• The Complete Poems of John Keats
• Byron's Don Juan and especially Childe Harold's Pilgrimage
• Lewis Carroll's The Hunting of the Snark
• Eliot's poetry, especially The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock and The Four Quartets
• Spenser's The Faerie Queene
• Whitman's Leaves of Grass
• Goethe's Faust, the first half of it

Thank you again everyone! :-) MelancholyDanish 02:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)MelancholyDanish

Horatius has always been one of my favorites. See Horatius Cocles for the background. 152.16.59.190 05:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, you might be interested in checking the links at Epic poetry. 152.16.59.190 06:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

One of my favorites: long and Romantic, but not blank verse: The Rime of the Ancient Mariner. --TotoBaggins 15:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at the list at Epic poetry, but I would highly recommend The Mahabharata and The Ramayana. Corvus cornix 17:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Style Parody

Here's a slightly simpler one... I'm baffled by this passage in Finnegans Wake (imagine that) and I really want to know what it's trying to parody:

Timple temple tells the bells. In syngagyng a sangasongue. For all in Ondslosby. And, the hag they damename Coverfew hists from her lane. And haste, 'tis time for bairns ta hame. Chickchilds, comeho to roo. Comehome to roo, wee chickchilds doo, when the wild- worewolf's abroad. Ah, let's away and let's gay and let's stay chez where the log foyer's burning!

I'd like to say it's some form of pastoral, but it seems most pastoral poetry is written in poetic form. It's obviously some sort of British or Anglo-Saxon folk-writing (among other things), but does anyone know the name? Thank you! 66.112.244.146 04:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)MelancholyDanish

It looks to me like a combination of fragments from nursery rhymes, reworked in an inscrutible Joycean manner. I'm not convinced that it is a good idea to recommend a book to read a book; but there are some labyrinths that need a thread! Ariadne suggests that you might try A Reader's Guide to Finnegans Wake by W. Y Tindall, which may help you find exactly what you are looking for. I suppose it is worthy of merit that you have journeyed as far as you have without an explanatory mentor. But what baffles me is why you believe this question to be simpler than your previous request, which merely asks for a list of epic poems. Clio the Muse 05:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Clio - sometimes I wonder if you're really the person who wrote Wikipedia ;-) 66.112.244.146 05:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)MelancholyDanish

Only the bad bits, MelancholyDanish; only the bad bits! Clio the Muse 07:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The Writer of the song, "And They'll Know We are Christians."

72.78.158.8 04:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)My question is that I recently came across a copy of this song that attributes the writing to Jason Upton. The copyright is 1966, and according to his biography, he was born in 1973. Could you tell me if the original songwriter was a different person or just someone with the same name.

Thank you.

Alfred Smith 72.78.158.8 04:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

A quick google search turns up a lot of sites listing Peter Scholtes as the original author. There are, however, many websites that contain the song along with additional text. Often, in these cases, the copyright notice usually mentions only the person's name who wrote the additional text on that page and does not correctly attribute the source of the song. 152.16.59.190 06:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Looking for an article...

I recently edited United States public debt; I am looking for an Wikipedia Article that states the debts of each of the 50 states, respectivly? Thanks. --Savedthat 04:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The Federal government of the United States is (and always has been) required by law to operate in debt, but the states are not. So, why do you assume that each of the 50 states has a public debt? --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about your assertion about the requirement to operate in debt, but as for individual state debts, even those states with balanced budget requirements in their constitutions have debt, in the form of bonds. I don't think that there is any state which does not have bond debt. Donald Hosek 16:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Looking for an article... (# 2)

I am looking for an article that has information regarding why the UK decided to not adopt the Euro. I just want to read what was going on why the politicians decided not to adopt the Euro. Thanks. --Savedthat 05:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The present government has decided that Five economic tests will have to be met first. Even then, Britain will only join if the matter is approved politically in a referendum. You might also wish to look at Euroscepticism. Clio the Muse 06:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Untitled Short Story

Hello. I was reading an unnamed short story where it had a character named Lou Parvizian. This story took place on an ocean liner going from San Francisco to Yokohama just after World War I. Even though, the narrator dislikes Lou Parvizian, Mr Parvizian assumes that the narrator enjoys his presence. Later, Lou Parvizian controls all events within the ship. He meets the Ramsays. They were talking about Japanese pearls. Mr Ramsay, came from a military post in Japan and brings his wife over to Japan for business purposes, claims that his wife's pearl necklace is authentic and was bought for an undervalued price of $18 from a department store. Mr Parvizian unsuccessfully bets Mr Ramsay $100 that the necklace is a fake. News spread throughout the ship. Mr Parvizian is humiliated. At the end, the narrator doesn't dislike Mr Parvizian as much as before. What is the title of that story? Thanks. --Mayfare 16:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You want to know the title of an unnamed short story? ◄Zahakiel► 17:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

lol, I like where this is going. 161.13.6.4 17:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)MelancholyDanish

Mayfare, the story is Mr Know-All by William Somerset Maugham. The character in question is not Lou Parvizian but Max Kelada. The way you tell it is not quite right. Kelada, an expert in pearls, and most other things, accepts Ramsay's bet to determine if his wife's are real or not. Mrs Ramsay, who lived apart from her husband while he served in the American Consulate in Kobe, is reluctant to hand the pearls to him, but Ramsay insists. Mr Kelada looks at them, smiles and is about to say something when he notices a look of terror on Mrs Ramsay's face. "'I was mistaken', he said, 'It's a very good imitation; but of course as soon as I looked through the glass I saw that it wasn't real. I think eighteen dollars is just about as much as the damned thing's worth.'" Whereupon he hands over the $100 forfeit to the triumphant Ramsay. Kelada is duly humiliated. The following morning he receives a letter, pushed through the door of the cabin he shares with the narrator of the story. It contains a $100 bill. "Were the pearls real?", the narrator asks. His only reply is "If I had a pretty little wife I shouldn't let her spend a year in New York while I stayed in Kobe." The narrator then no longer has the same degree of dislike for Mr Know-All.

You should find this in any decent collection of Maugham's collected stories. The one I have is in the first volume of Collected Short Stories, published by Vintage Paperbacks in 2000. Best wishes from Miss Know-All, otherwise recognised as Clio the Muse 18:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Human images in Islam

I thought that human (and probably other images of living things) were banned in Islam. This gave rise to the distinctive decorative style found in mosques and so on. Yet television seems to be very common in the Arab world, and is used even by the most fanatical and the most religious. Clearly, television represents people. How is this inconsistency accounted for please? 80.0.98.213 18:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The concept of "images" in monotheistic tradition is tied to a desire to avoid objects of worship (e.g., the worship of idols, the veneration of saints - in some cases - or other distinguished figures). This leads to the abesence of portraits, statues, in some cases photographs, etc. Television, like radio, is viewed more as a communication medium, and there is no lasting "object" that could potentially be the target of undue praise. ◄Zahakiel► 18:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I also remember finding years ago on a seat in the London tube a discarded Arabic newspaper. It had a seductive picture of an attractive young woman in it - it seemed just put there to titilate rather than having any news value or any story with it. She did however have her legs covered. Wouldnt this have been un-Islamic? And in Iraq there seemed to be many images of Sadaam Hussein, and in Iran posters of various religious leaders. So even still images are commonplace. Even this site http://www.islamicity.com/ abounds in images of humans, including even a "picture gallery" of women's faces in its marriage section! This is still an inconsistency even given the comment above. 80.0.132.197 19:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The head of state

Hello, In wich countries in Europe women is the head of state? And is Micheline Calmy-Rey the head of state of Switzerland? Thanks.

Armand de Quatrefages

Is anyone familiar with the contents of Quatrefages's 1871 essay La race prussiene? It was published during the Franco-Prussian War, so I imagine it must be quite hostile? Friedrich James 19:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)